[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: OpenPackages comments
On Monday, September 11, 2000, at 05:17 PM, Will Andrews wrote:
> We *DO* currently use /usr/local for where to install things by default
> (X stuff goes in /usr/X11R6, which may or may not be cool, depending on
> your perspective). However, I (and others, including David O'Brien)
> think it's really a misnomer, because /usr/local should be reserved for
> those things that TRULY are local to a machine. After all, installed
> packages may be shared across machines.
Well, I do agree that there is a need for two directories, one which
might be a network mount. But I don't think that that is related to
whether an item is a package or not. We have:
a- Stuff that comes with the system (/usr)
b- Stuff the user installs (/usr/local)
c- Stuff installs at a site and shared (?)
Some people mount the last on /usr/local, which I agree is a bit
I'd like to be able to do all three. Base system software should
be packageable into units which can be independantly upgraded (as I
suggested earlier); that case a. User installs a port on local disk
is case b, and site admin installs on a shared volume for case c.
So I'd expect a package to either be from the OS distributor, which
means it goes into /usr, or other, which can either be local or shared
at the installing user's option.
That suggests a need for a standard case c directory, and /usr/pkg
doesn't sound quite right to me.
Wilfredo Sánchez, email@example.com
Open Source Engineering Lead
Apple Computer, Inc., Core Operating System Group
1 Infinite Loop, Cupertino, CA 94086, 408.974-5174
To unsubscribe: send mail to <firstname.lastname@example.org>
with "unsubscribe bsdports" in the body of the message