Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 12:08:40 -0500 From: Brian Dean <bsd@bsdhome.com> To: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Confusing error messages from shell image activation Message-ID: <20001210120840.C38697@vger.bsdhome.com> In-Reply-To: <14899.43958.622675.847234@guru.mired.org>; from mwm@mired.org on Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 10:13:42AM -0600 References: <14898.33404.356173.963351@guru.mired.org> <14898.31393.228926.763711@guru.mired.org> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0012091347030.88984-100000@turtle.looksharp.net> <200012100904.CAA27546@harmony.village.org> <3A336781.94E1646@newsguy.com> <14899.41809.754369.259894@guru.mired.org> <200012101557.KAA29588@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> <14899.43958.622675.847234@guru.mired.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 10:13:42AM -0600, Mike Meyer wrote: > Whether or not it's part of FreeBSD is immaterial. It's part of the > distribution that comes from FreeBSD, and is treated differentlyh from > locally installed software (whether written locally or by a third > party) in every case *except* where it installs - and that's only > because it's installed in the wrong place. > > In other words, "It's not part of FreeBSD" is a rationalization. You are really reaching here. Contributed software that the FreeBSD Project has chosen to integrate, i.e., Perl, Sendmail, just to name a few, are integrated tightly and installed in /usr/bin, etc, not in /usr/local. Ports, on the other hand are installed in /usr/local or /usr/X11R6. You seem to mis-understand that a FreeBSD port is basically a set of patches and a source fetching mechanism that is included with FreeBSD as a convenience for building and installing third party software. The actual software that gets built and installed is _not_ part of FreeBSD. This is not a rationalization. I for one would be really upset if when I installed a Port, it's binaries started getting dropped into /bin, /usr/bin, etc. I suspect many others would too. I'm really not exactly sure what you are complaining about. For example, the last time I built Emacs for Solaris (several years ago admittedly), by default it installed itself into /usr/local. If you install Emacs onto FreeBSD, it goes into /usr/local. The behaviour is the same. Are you proposing that since FreeBSD provides a set of patches so that Emacs builds cleanly, that it should therefore install it somewhere other than /usr/local? -Brian -- Brian Dean bsd@FreeBSD.org bsd@bsdhome.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20001210120840.C38697>