Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 10 Dec 2000 02:04:36 -0700
From:      Warner Losh <imp@village.org>
To:        Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org>
Cc:        "Brandon D. Valentine" <bandix@looksharp.net>, Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>, current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Confusing error messages from shell image activation 
Message-ID:  <200012100904.CAA27546@harmony.village.org>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 09 Dec 2000 13:05:32 CST." <14898.33404.356173.963351@guru.mired.org> 
References:  <14898.33404.356173.963351@guru.mired.org>  <14898.31393.228926.763711@guru.mired.org> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0012091347030.88984-100000@turtle.looksharp.net> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <14898.33404.356173.963351@guru.mired.org> Mike Meyer writes:
: Corrections first: The only place where FreeBSD fails to follow FHS
: (in my quick perusal of it) is in putting packages in /usr/local
: instead of /opt. You can't blame that part of FHS on Linux - I have as
: yet to see a Linux distro or package do it that way. No, this bit
: comes from commercial vendors, where it's also steeped in years of
: tradition.

Not as many as you might think.  /usr/local predates /opt by several
years.

: Rant second: FreeBSD *violates* years of traditions with it's
: treatment of /usr/local. /usr/local is for *local* things, not add-on
: software packages! Coopting /usr/local for non-local software creates
: needless complexity and confusion, which of course leads to needless
: pain.

Ummm, software packages have been make installing into /usr/local
since at least 1985 when I started building them.  no coopting has
been done.

Warner


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




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200012100904.CAA27546>