Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 10 Dec 2000 23:27:48 +0200
From:      Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr>
To:        Cliff Sarginson <cliff@raggedclown.net>
Cc:        Erik Trulsson <ertr1013@student.uu.se>, questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Root and the C Shell
Message-ID:  <20001210232747.B2878@hades.hell.gr>
In-Reply-To: <00121019403703.01067@buffy>; from cliff@raggedclown.net on Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 07:40:37PM %2B0100
References:  <00121017490501.01067@buffy> <20001210180621.A20292@student.uu.se> <00121019403703.01067@buffy>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 07:40:37PM +0100, Cliff Sarginson wrote:
>
> I am not used to seeing /usr/local used to profliagtely on the Unix systems
> I work on .. ah well..

Well, nothing from the `base system' should go under /usr/local or something
is very wrong with your installation.  I find the FreeBSD semantics very
clear in this matter.  "What comes from /usr/src and the base system sources
eventually ends up under /usr somewhere, when installed.  What comes from the
ports, ends up being installed somewhere under /usr/local."

Seems ok to me.

- giorgos


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?20001210232747.B2878>