Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 23:05:10 -0800 (PST) From: invalid opcode <coredump@nervosa.com> To: Paul Traina <pst@shockwave.com> Cc: FreeBSD-current <current@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: /usr/local/libexec vs /usr/local/sbin Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.960214230500.234B-100000@nervosa.com> In-Reply-To: <199602150549.VAA05414@precipice.shockwave.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Well in that case, the identd port needs to be update, ill email the maintainer, still wondering about the man pages though. Also, what exactly do you mean by "standalone", in.telnetd could be classified as standalone, couldn't it? Chris Layne, coredump@nervosa.com. On Wed, 14 Feb 1996, Paul Traina wrote: > Yes, you're absolutely correct, UNLESS they are standalone daemons, in > which case, sbin is correct (e.g. sendmail, inetd) > > From: invalid opcode <coredump@nervosa.com> > Subject: /usr/local/libexec vs /usr/local/sbin > Shouldn't local daemon's, i.e. identd, imapd, go into /usr/local/libexec > rather than /usr/local/sbin? Also, shouldn't local man pages go into > /usr/local/share/man? I'm just trying to establish some consistency. > > Chris Layne, > coredump@nervosa.com. > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.91.960214230500.234B-100000>