Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 02:41:09 -0700 (PDT) From: "David E. O'Brien" <obrien@Nuxi.cs.ucdavis.edu> To: kientzle@netcom.com Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Linux async vs. FreeBSD sync (fwd) Message-ID: <199608280941.CAA16984@relay.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <199608272159.OAA22646@netcom2.netcom.com> from "kientzle@netcom.com" at "Aug 27, 96 02:59:23 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> An alternative package system that I've been using successfully for several
> months now is to install _every_ application in it's own private directory,
> and then populate /usr/local/{lib,bin,include,man} with appropriate
> symlinks. For example, I have "ispell" installed in /usr/local/app/ispell
> as follows:
Yuck, yuck, yuck. I used to like this idea until I had to live with one
someone setup. Now in my research lab of 20 Sparcs (running a mix of
Solaris and SunOS -- which was a part of the reason for the symlink
idea), I *HATE IT*. Links rot, and your perl script has to be *very*
carefully crafted to do the Right Thing at all times. Otherwise you get
a *big* mess.
Also, this has been discussed (here I belive, or maybe -chat) about 6
months ago. Didn't have too much support except for a few if I remember
correctly.
> > > I do have a wish list for FreeBSD, however. A packaging system similar
> > > to Red Hat Linux's RPM or Debian's dpkg would be nice. ...
Like what? I've used FreeBSD's packages several times to ween Linux
Slackware (and others) users to FreeBSD. With the packages system, it is
just too easy :-) to populate a /usr/local tree. (of course I won't go
into my opinions that we should be using /usr/pkg rather than /usr/local
-- that is for truely local things....)
-- David (obrien@cs.ucdavis.edu)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199608280941.CAA16984>