Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 09:54:10 +0930 From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: Brandon Gillespie <brandon@roguetrader.com> Cc: jbryant@tfs.net, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: what do you think ... should/could ports move to -> /usr/local/ports ? Message-ID: <19970909095410.37753@lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970908154549.20910B-100000@roguetrader.com>; from Brandon Gillespie on Mon, Sep 08, 1997 at 03:50:21PM -0600 References: <199709081852.NAA01461@argus.tfs.net> <Pine.BSF.3.96.970908154549.20910B-100000@roguetrader.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Sep 08, 1997 at 03:50:21PM -0600, Brandon Gillespie wrote: > On Mon, 8 Sep 1997, Jim Bryant wrote: > >> In reply: >>> 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.. >> >> ACK!@# E-V-I-L!!!!!!! E-V-I-L!!!!!!! E-V-I-L!!!!!!! E-V-I-L!!!!!!! > > 8) > >> This would require all that much more hacking to makefiles and include >> files, not to mention those lame few proggies that hardcode paths in >> the source code... >> >> Besides, assuming /usr don't come up, why bother having /local come >> up, as almost everything in /local will reference the symlink >> /usr/local... > > Hmm, true... actually, I was thinking of just having /usr/local as a link > there for posterity and familiarity, but having the programs use /local as > the prefix. I guess basically what i'm getting at is that to place these > in a filesystem off root, we shouldn't use an existing name, as then > people would assume the rest follows existing conventions (i.e. /opt) > which would not be the case, thus a different name would be in order, and > the first thing to pop into my head was simply /local :) Sure, but that's just a name. /opt has already been in use for some years. Why change the name? Greg
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19970909095410.37753>