From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Apr 17 10:49:11 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from roble.com (roble.com [206.40.34.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10A6037B7DD for ; Mon, 17 Apr 2000 10:49:09 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sendmail@roble.com) Received: from roble2.roble.com (roble2.roble.com [206.40.34.52]) by roble.com (Roble1b) with SMTP id KAA02961 for ; Mon, 17 Apr 2000 10:49:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 10:49:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Roger Marquis To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Shared /bin and /sbin Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Matthew Dillon wrote: >I much prefer the FreeBSD way of doing things. There should be only one >lib -- /usr/lib, and things critical to booting should be compiled static. Agreed, multiple dynamic OS library paths would also violate the KIS principle. >Obviously people with special needs can compile the binaries up however >they like, but I don't think we should change the base distribution's >way of doing things. Applications should have separate directories i.e., /usr/local/apache/lib and /usr/X11R6/lib, to keep from overwriting each other (as in /usr/local/lib) but, IMHO, nobody's yet made a compelling argument for multiple OS library paths. -- Roger Marquis Roble Systems Consulting http://www.roble.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message