[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: OpenPackages comments

On Tuesday, September 12, 2000, at 09:59 AM, Paul Richards wrote:

> With it's current usage I think creating a new location, other than 
> /usr/local is a good idea, so that /usr/local goes back to being an area 
> that is outside the scope of the OS. 
> The issue of sharing packages across machines is a trickier one. If 
> we're going to come up with a new directory layout then perhaps it 
> should be 
> /pkg/export 
> /pkg/local 
> to differentiate between files that are host specific and those that can 
> be shared. 
> Although, if the base system and packages become synonymouse then 
> packages can just install into the same directory structure as the base 
> system since everything including the base OS is just another package 
> and can be managed like any other package. 

  I still see a need to distinguish between packages that are provided
by, say FreeBSD proper, and packages that are "other".  The former would
go into the base tree, and the rest into /usr/local and /usr/export (or
whatever).  /usr/local seems fine for non-OS packages.


Wilfredo Sánchez, wsanchez@apple.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 <majordomo@unixathome.org>
with "unsubscribe bsdports" in the body of the message