Date: Sat, 9 Dec 2000 13:05:32 -0600 (CST) From: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> To: "Brandon D. Valentine" <bandix@looksharp.net> Cc: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Confusing error messages from shell image activation Message-ID: <14898.33404.356173.963351@guru.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0012091347030.88984-100000@turtle.looksharp.net> References: <14898.31393.228926.763711@guru.mired.org> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0012091347030.88984-100000@turtle.looksharp.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Brandon D. Valentine <bandix@looksharp.net> types: > >There are other places where FreeBSD doesn't comply with the > >appropriate standard - packages vs. FHS, for instance. I claim that > We don't seek to comply with the arbitrarily devised linux filesystem > standard. We comply with hier(5), a standard steeped in decades of > tradition. Corrections first: The only place where FreeBSD fails to follow FHS (in my quick perusal of it) is in putting packages in /usr/local instead of /opt. You can't blame that part of FHS on Linux - I have as yet to see a Linux distro or package do it that way. No, this bit comes from commercial vendors, where it's also steeped in years of tradition. Rant second: FreeBSD *violates* years of traditions with it's treatment of /usr/local. /usr/local is for *local* things, not add-on software packages! Coopting /usr/local for non-local software creates needless complexity and confusion, which of course leads to needless pain. All of which has nothing to do with the question of whether we want to continue giving error messages that are wrong, or commit this patch and provide ones that are actually informative. <mike 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?14898.33404.356173.963351>