Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 23 Apr 2001 18:14:39 -0500
From:      Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org>
To:        "Thomas (Matt) Barton" <matt@fear.net>
Cc:        <questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   Re: How Is The FeeBSD OS Like and Different Than Say Redhat or Suse LINUX
Message-ID:  <15076.46943.819845.562426@guru.mired.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0104231728370.6614-100000@fear.net>
References:  <15076.41600.510678.517464@guru.mired.org> <Pine.LNX.4.33.0104231728370.6614-100000@fear.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thomas (Matt) Barton <matt@fear.net> types:
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, Mike Meyer wrote:
> 
> > Actually, everything installs in /usr/local or /usr/X11R6, but only by
> > default. You can change both of those defaults globally, and it works
> > fairly well. Trying to change it for one package is pretty dicey.
> > NetBSD choice of putting things in /usr/pkgs (or some such) instead of
> > /usr/local has some advantages.
> 
> I'm mainly happy that it just put it all in one place by default and I can
> worry about more important things.  It makes it convenient.
> 
> Just out of curiosity, though, what are the advantages about NetBSD using
> /usr/pkgs instead of /usr/local?

This is a political issue, and comes up every once and a
while. Basically, there are some people who feel that packages/ports
don't fit under the traditional use of /usr/local. For instance,
/usr/opt (where I put /usr/local) is on /usr and gets backed up with
/usr. /usr/local is reserved for things that I don't have copies of on
the FreeBSD cdroms or CVSUP server, and points at a place that get
backed up on a different schedule.

Moving packages to /usr/pkgs means we get them split. Those who think
they shouldn't be split can just symlink /usr/local to /usr/pkgs, or
vice versa, and get what they have now with one extra symlink.  The
reverse doesn't work.

Also, moving packages to /usr/pkgs by default means ports developers
have to actually *fix* all the /usr/local dependencies in the port. In
general, they do a good job and most are quite prompt about fixing
broken ports - especially if you provide them - but it'd be nice if
that problem just didn't come up.

	<mike
--
Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org>			http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/
Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15076.46943.819845.562426>