From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Sep  8 10:19:19 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id KAA13133
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 8 Sep 1997 10:19:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from roguetrader.com (brandon@cold.org [206.81.134.103])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA13127
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Mon, 8 Sep 1997 10:19:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (brandon@localhost)
	by roguetrader.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id LAA19860;
	Mon, 8 Sep 1997 11:19:42 -0600 (MDT)
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 11:19:41 -0600 (MDT)
From: Brandon Gillespie <brandon@roguetrader.com>
To: Brian Mitchell <brian@firehouse.net>
cc: Lutz Albers <lutz@muc.de>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: what do you think ... should/could ports move to -> /usr/local/ports ?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSI.3.95.970908063722.24543A-100000@shell.firehouse.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970908111815.19593A-100000@roguetrader.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 8 Sep 1997, Brian Mitchell wrote:

> On Mon, 8 Sep 1997, Lutz Albers wrote:
> 
> what about /usr/contrib like bsd/os?

its no different than /usr/local, just a different name.

I think the main issue here is that people feel /usr/local/ should be a
different fs (I agree), but many feel its unclean to mount from anything
other than root.

Suggestion: mount it on /local, and symlink /usr/local to /local..

-Brandon