From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Sep 10 02:08:34 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id CAA18650 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 10 Sep 1997 02:08:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from colin.muc.de (root@colin.muc.de [193.174.4.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id CAA18642 for ; Wed, 10 Sep 1997 02:08:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tavari.muc.de ([193.174.4.22]) by colin.muc.de with SMTP id <86046-2>; Wed, 10 Sep 1997 11:08:14 +0200 Received: from [192.168.42.51] (aleisha [192.168.42.51]) by tavari.muc.de (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18189; Wed, 10 Sep 1997 10:48:35 +0200 (CEST) X-Sender: lutz@mail Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <97Sep9.174547pdt.177486@crevenia.parc.xerox.com> References: Your message of "Mon, 08 Sep 97 01:50:58 PDT." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 10:42:12 +0200 To: Bill Fenner From: Lutz Albers Subject: Re: what do you think ... should/could ports move to -> /usr/local/ports ? Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Bill Fenner wrote on 10.09.1997 Re: what do you think ... should/could ports move to -> /u >Lutz Albers wrote: >>Or use the modules system (see ). You would use the >>command >> module add >>to add it to PATH, and >> module delete >>to remove it. > >We use something like this at PARC. It's incredibly useful, since >it allows you to have multiple versions of software around and turn >them on or off individually without having to rename executables, but >I'm always running into hard-coded limits. My $PATH is nearly 1k bytes >long, and if it gets any longer random programs start misbehaving in >various strange ways. Same with $MANPATH. Yep, I known that. I've patched my copy of tcsh to cope with PATH lengths up to 4K. There is a #define to change that. ciao lutz -- Lutz Albers, lutz@muc.de, pgp key available from Do not take life too seriously, you will never get out of it alive.