Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 22:33:53 +0800 From: Peter Wemm <peter@jhome.DIALix.COM> To: Paul Richards <p.richards@elsevier.co.uk> Cc: CVS-committers@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-ports@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/net/socks5 Makefile Message-ID: <199604251433.WAA00981@jhome.DIALix.COM> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 25 Apr 1996 14:44:36 %2B0100." <199604251344.OAA22208@cadair.elsevier.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>In reply to Peter Wemm who said
>>
>> Incidently, I'm not happy with this part of the porting rules.
>>
>> Everything under /usr is supposed to be able to be network shared, and some
>> ports put stuff in /usr/local/etc which cannot be shared under any
>> circumstances (eg: ssh).
>>
>
>Who says? /usr/local/share is but not /usr. In fact /usr/local/ is
>suppose to be, well, local. If you want to share that then deal with it
>yourself because it's a site defined area.
To throw a bit of fuel on the fire; from "man 7 hier":
/etc/ system configuration files and scripts
...
/usr/ contains the majority of user utilities and applications
...
...
share/ architecture-independent ascii text files
...
The "share" directory was intended to mean shareable between different
architectures. All the "per-machine" config is documented as belonging
somewhere in /etc. /usr/local is deliberately vaguely defined.. It says
just "local", not "per-machine". This can mean anything from "local to
the machine", to "local to the site" to "local to FreeBSD", etc.
>On the flipside, there's kind of a FreeBSD layout imposed on /usr/local
>for those who wish to make use of it and perhaps some re-organisation might
>be made to allow per host configuration areas for those who want to nfs
>export the packages installed there.
Yes.. We do kinda "impose" a layout on /usr/local that forces it to be
non-shareable, when everything else on /usr is (except
perhaps /usr/share/man/cat*). I can live with the imposed layout in order to
use the ports, even though I dont like it that much. (I prefer something more
like a /wherever/pkgname/{bin|lib|etc|man} type layout :-)
IMHO, certain files give me the creeps defaulting to somewhere that I rdist
and have to make exclusion lists for. I dont expect I'm the only one who's
working towards a replicated cluster type arrangement that doesn't involve
logging into every single machine each time there's a trivial change to be
made. :-)
(And yes, the reason I protested so strongly about the ssh secret host keys
last time was because I wasn't paying enough attention and got burned. Since
day one, ssh defaulted to /etc for it's config and secret keys, and when I
read the patches, it gives no clues that the Makefile (which I skipped)
changes it :-( )
>--
> Paul Richards. Originative Solutions Ltd. (Netcraft Ltd. contractor)
> Elsevier Science TIS online journal project.
> Email: p.richards@elsevier.co.uk
> Phone: 0370 462071 (Mobile), +44 (0)1865 843155
Cheers,
-Peter
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199604251433.WAA00981>