Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 18:30:26 -0500 From: Andrew Hesford <ajh3@chmod.ath.cx> To: "Thomas (Matt) Barton" <matt@fear.net> Cc: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org>, questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: How Is The FeeBSD OS Like and Different Than Say Redhat or Suse LINUX Message-ID: <20010423183026.B4557@cec.wustl.edu> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0104231728370.6614-100000@fear.net>; from matt@fear.net on Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 05:29:24PM -0400 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
On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 05:29:24PM -0400, Thomas (Matt) Barton wrote: > Just out of curiosity, though, what are the advantages about NetBSD using > /usr/pkgs instead of /usr/local? > > -- > > Matt Barton matt@fear.net > Indianapolis, IN http://www.mattbarton.ws/ Well, I certainly think the motive was good: keep locally-built stuff in /usr/local, base stuff in /usr, and packages in /usr/pkgs. The only practical advantage I see is further division of software. It's solely a matter of personal preference. I personally think the practices of both FreeBSD and NetBSD are just fine. Both are better than the linux package-default of dumping everything into /usr, which makes administration and organization an absolute nightmare. Both rpm and dpkg do this, and I absolutely hate it. As far as the BSDs are concerned, if you ask me, stick with the layout that the system uses by default. One beauty of UNIX is its customizability, but for something trivial, where both options are interchangeable, I think customization is foolish. -- Andrew Hesford ajh3@chmod.ath.cx 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?20010423183026.B4557>