From owner-freebsd-arch Wed Jun 19 6:27:49 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from thuvia.demon.co.uk (thuvia.demon.co.uk [193.237.34.248]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DE0C37B404 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2002 06:27:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dotar.thuvia.org (dotar.thuvia.org [10.0.0.4]) by phaidor.thuvia.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g5JDQnN67446; Wed, 19 Jun 2002 14:26:49 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mark@thuvia.demon.co.uk) Received: from dotar.thuvia.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by dotar.thuvia.org (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g5JDQmCs039571; Wed, 19 Jun 2002 14:26:48 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mark@dotar.thuvia.org) Received: (from mark@localhost) by dotar.thuvia.org (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id g5JDQmAo039570; Wed, 19 Jun 2002 14:26:48 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 14:26:48 +0100 (BST) From: Mark Valentine Message-Id: <200206191326.g5JDQmAo039570@dotar.thuvia.org> In-Reply-To: Alexey Dokuchaev's message of Jun 19, 1:04pm X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.6 beta(5) 10/07/98) To: danfe@regency.nsu.ru (Alexey Dokuchaev), Ollivier Robert Subject: Re: Why don't we search /usr/local/lib and /usr/local/include by default? Cc: FreeBSD-arch@freebsd.org Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > From: danfe@regency.nsu.ru (Alexey Dokuchaev) > Date: Wed 19 Jun, 2002 > Subject: Re: Why don't we search /usr/local/lib and /usr/local/include by default? > The idea of ports separated from the base is a lot of help > when dealing with system upgrade/backup/wipe-out. Heck, I could have > simply "rm -rf /usr/local" and get rid of all non-X11 ports I have ;-) > And still get the box running. Yes, that separation is invaluable. > 3-rd party should go in /usr/local (OK, X11 goes in /usr/X11R6), thus > leaving /usr populated by the base only. Period. Except that /usr/local is the wrong place for FreeBSD's binary packages, since they are quite likely to conflict with *local* policy. For two decades my /usr/local has followed a uniform cross-platform policy with an established structure and administration regime, and it's simply not possible to install a typical FreeBSD package non-destructively. I certainly hope that a next generation ports system uses a different default location: /opt, /usr/pkg, or whatever, but leave /usr/local to *local* policy. I even have to patch /usr/local out of BSD.usr.dist here (I raised that flag a long time ago in PR misc/355). Mark. -- Mark Valentine, Thuvia Labs "Tigers will do ANYTHING for a tuna fish sandwich." Mark Valentine uses "We're kind of stupid that way." *munch* *munch* and endorses FreeBSD -- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message