Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 13:38:26 -0600 (CST) From: Lars Eighner <luvbeastie@larseighner.com> To: Matt Fioravante <fmatthew5876@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Installing ports to /usr Message-ID: <20071114133802.M51192@qroenaqrq.6qbyyneqvnyhc.pbz> In-Reply-To: <3eca10930711141005m5ceb5d8bve7a1b6f235057342@mail.gmail.com> References: <3eca10930711141005m5ceb5d8bve7a1b6f235057342@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, Matt Fioravante wrote: > Would there be any negative ramifications to installing ports in /usr > instead of /usr/local? Like could they potentially clobber system > binaries and other files or is this pretty safe to do? I know of a few name conflicts that can occur in certain circumstances (such as the system lpr and hplip lpr). You may be lucky and avoid these. It is also possible that some ports will not find one another or that wrong locations may be hard coded --- this should not happen, but there should not be any broken ports, unfetchable sources and so forth. Such an arrangement would require extreme vigilance, beyond what the ports management software can do (if they can be persuaded to work at all in such an environment). I cannot think of a good reason to do what you want to do, but you ought to be very clear that somehow there is no other way and be prepared for the consequences. -- Lars Eighner http://www.larseighner.com/index.html 8800 N IH35 APT 1191 AUSTIN TX 78753-5266
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20071114133802.M51192>