Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 16:58:37 +0300 From: Ion-Mihai Tetcu <itetcu@apropo.ro> To: Steve Coile <scoile@nandomedia.com> Cc: "FreeBSD-Questions \(Request\)" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs. RedHat Message-ID: <20031002165837.7ed82ee2.itetcu@apropo.ro> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0310020813270.2212-100000@localhost.localdomain> References: <20031002101427.0f1e983f.itetcu@apropo.ro> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0310020813270.2212-100000@localhost.localdomain>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 08:24:33 -0400 (EDT) Steve Coile <scoile@nandomedia.com> wrote: > On Thu, 2 Oct 2003, Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: > [...] > >That is one of the things we like most. We can always find things > >where they're supposed to be, not where someone chose to put them > >for some particular reason. And that on each and every machine we > >have. > > Uhhh... The hier(7) man page is part of every flavor of UNIX. > Every flavor defines some standard for filesystem layout. This > isn't a BSD-only thing. > > Further, FreeBSD isn't the only distribution that puts things "where > they're supposed to be". "Where they're supposed to be" is defined > by Unix community convention and the OS vendor. You really should > be saying"FreeBSD puts things where I expect them to be". Your > expectations don't necessarily conform to Unix community convention. :) True. Better yetto say that FreeBSD has learned me to expect some type of files to be in specific places. So it's some identity ;) here. What I was trying to point out is that "real and original directory structures" of a what_ever_I_get_from _the_net should conform to hier(7) (of what ever system they are installed on ..., in particular for bsd's hier). Qmail and friends bothers me for that. > One thing that bugs me about many Unix vendors, including FreeBSD, > is a willingness to put state files under /usr. /usr should not [..] > I can put /usr on a separate partition, make it read-only, and not > have to worry about something tinkering with it. And I can put /var > on another partition, > prevent execute permission on it, and not have to worry > about some hacker installing (binary) tools on it. You got a point here. If you're asking me, the *big* design problem is the suid thing. [..] I'm not trying to start a flame here. I'm using Linux on some desktops and I've moved 90% percent of one customer pcs from win to a FreeBSd Linux mix. In fact my first contact with the *nix world was with a Red Hat. (Still remember a few hours with an old System V book and LILO refusing to boot :-) ). After which I've got 2.2.2 FreeBSD and felt in love :). > packages installed on my Red Hat Linux system came from, either. > Oh, and that's *ALL* the files provided by the operating system, not > just those installed with add-on packages. For instance: > > $ rpm -qf /etc/passwd > setup-2.5.25-1 buh>/ports/distfiles# which passwd /usr/bin/passwd so it's /usr/src/usr.bin/passwd/ (==> /usr/obj/usr/src/usr.bin/passwd/) Now consider no hier - I've did the mistake of inventing my on directory structure for an app once and I still suffer. I still think that the ports system is (at least for my needs) superior to rmps. It simplify the building from source in many cases, but you can always do a make extract and start patching around. -- IOnut FreeBSD unregistered ;) user
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031002165837.7ed82ee2.itetcu>