Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Ryan Schmidt
On Apr 4, 2012, at 00:44, Jan Stary wrote: On Apr 03 17:54:05, saiwingy wrote: Since MacPorts is not compatible with /usr/local, every time I install/update ports I had to sudo mv /usr/local /usr/local.bak Why would you move /usr/local? Macports live under /opt/local by default and

Re: Shenidam

2012-04-04 Thread Ryan Schmidt
On Apr 3, 2012, at 15:15, Ryan Schmidt wrote: On Apr 3, 2012, at 14:44, Sam Kuper wrote: Is Shenidam a viable candidate for being ported into MacPorts? I'll see if I can make a port. I can't quite get it working. Here's what I've got so far: https://trac.macports.org/ticket/33891 If

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Saiwing Yeung
On Apr 3, 2012, at 8:40 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: On Apr 3, 2012, at 19:54, saiwingy wrote: Since MacPorts is not compatible with /usr/local, every time I install/update ports I had to sudo mv /usr/local /usr/local.bak and then after I am done building macports stuff I would move it back.

Re: Shenidam

2012-04-04 Thread Sam Kuper
On 4 April 2012 07:45, Ryan Schmidt ryandes...@macports.org wrote: On Apr 3, 2012, at 15:15, Ryan Schmidt wrote: On Apr 3, 2012, at 14:44, Sam Kuper wrote: Is Shenidam a viable candidate for being ported into MacPorts? I'll see if I can make a port. I can't quite get it working. Here's what

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Jan Stary
Since MacPorts is not compatible with /usr/local, every time I install/update ports I had to sudo mv /usr/local /usr/local.bak Why would you move /usr/local? Macports live under /opt/local by default and have nothing to do with /usr/local. Having things installed in

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Chris Jones
Hi, I don't install things there, but there are things in there (mostly from Mac OS) that I'd like to keep and use. I might be wrong but I understand OS X itself does not put anything in /usr/local. Anything you might have there has probably come from other third party applications you

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Chris Jones
Hi, I thought the whole reason for living under /opt/local was *not* to interfere with /usr/local. How exactly does having /usr/local interfere? Things from macports silently picking up things from /usr/local? Is that the problem? The issue is some packages have hard coded dependencies to

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Phil Dobbin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 04/04/2012 10:17, Chris Jones wrote: I thought the whole reason for living under /opt/local was *not* to interfere with /usr/local. How exactly does having /usr/local interfere? Things from macports silently picking up things from /usr/local?

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Michael Parchet
Le 04.04.12 08:38, Ryan Schmidt a écrit : Hello, The macport home directory is opt/local not usr/local Best regards mparchet On Apr 4, 2012, at 00:44, Jan Stary wrote: On Apr 03 17:54:05, saiwingy wrote: Since MacPorts is not compatible with /usr/local, every time I install/update ports I

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Brandon Allbery
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 03:45, Saiwing Yeung saiw...@berkeley.edu wrote: On Apr 3, 2012, at 8:40 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: On Apr 3, 2012, at 19:54, saiwingy wrote: Since MacPorts is not compatible with /usr/local, every time I install/update We don't install things in /usr/local. Why do

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Jan Stary
On Apr 04 10:17:23, Chris Jones wrote: Hi, I thought the whole reason for living under /opt/local was *not* to interfere with /usr/local. How exactly does having /usr/local interfere? Things from macports silently picking up things from /usr/local? Is that the problem? The issue is some

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Daniel J. Luke
On Apr 4, 2012, at 10:51 AM, Jan Stary wrote: Most packages are developed on linux OSes, where /user/local is quite normal and thus they just consider this the 'right thing to do'... In principle packages should provide options to avoid this, and when they do MacPorts can use them, but not

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Jan Stary
I just find it quite extreme to expect the user to not have /usr/local around. The reason macports uses /opt/local (if I am not wrong) is that macports realizes that people *do* have /usr/local around. I, personally, have had /usr/local around for forever. The issue is that if you

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Jeremy Lavergne
OK, I can understand that. Did I really miss this bit in the documentation? Can someone point me please? I believe it should be clearly stated in the Guide. It is not in the Guide, however the FAQ wiki page references it: https://trac.macports.org/wiki/FAQ#defaultprefix smime.p7s

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Jan Stary
On Apr 04 10:22:37, Jeremy Lavergne wrote: OK, I can understand that. Did I really miss this bit in the documentation? Can someone point me please? I believe it should be clearly stated in the Guide. It is not in the Guide, however the FAQ wiki page references it:

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Jeremy Lavergne
Yes, that's what I have read. But that just says why macports uses /opt/local: because it cannot use /usr/local, for the reasons listed. This here is something *different*: namely, that (1) There might still be problems if the user has /usr/local around. • Some software

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Jan Stary
On Apr 04 10:34:48, Jeremy Lavergne wrote: Yes, that's what I have read. But that just says why macports uses /opt/local: because it cannot use /usr/local, for the reasons listed. This here is something *different*: namely, that (1) There might still be problems if the user has

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Saiwing Yeung
oh... I didn't know that. I just took a look in my /usr/local, and found a whole bunch of stuff for texlive, and then various programs that I remember installing. is there a recommended place for me to put these programs? On Apr 4, 2012, at 2:12 AM, Chris Jones wrote: Hi, I don't

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Ryan Schmidt
On Apr 4, 2012, at 10:55, Jan Stary wrote: In fact, I believe it is a good candidate for a FAQ immediately following https://trac.macports.org/wiki/FAQ#defaultprefix: Q: So given that macports uses /opt/local as its prefix, I can use /usr/local freely without worying about interference?

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Ryan Schmidt
On Apr 4, 2012, at 11:16, Saiwing Yeung wrote: oh... I didn't know that. I just took a look in my /usr/local, and found a whole bunch of stuff for texlive, and then various programs that I remember installing. is there a recommended place for me to put these programs? Any other place on

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Glenn English
On Apr 4, 2012, at 9:55 AM, Jan Stary wrote: Q: So given that macports uses /opt/local as its prefix, I can use /usr/local freely without worying about interference? A: No, not really. (etc) I'd really like to see an expansion of that etc. I use Linux extensively for my servers and Macs

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Jeremy Lavergne
I use Linux extensively for my servers and Macs when I'm trying to be a human. /usr/local has been around for quite a while in the *nix world (it's even in the default $PATH), and I use it a little on the Macs. I can't think of what the problem is -- (seems to) work fine here :-) I don't

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Ryan Schmidt
On Apr 4, 2012, at 11:20, Glenn English wrote: On Apr 4, 2012, at 9:55 AM, Jan Stary wrote: Q: So given that macports uses /opt/local as its prefix, I can use /usr/local freely without worying about interference? A: No, not really. (etc) I'd really like to see an expansion of that

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Glenn English
On Apr 4, 2012, at 10:26 AM, Jeremy Lavergne wrote: I don't see /usr/local in my system's default for $PATH, either on 10.6 or 10.7. Sorry. Maybe I should have said, the default *nix $PATH. I don't know about others. OTOH, here's my user $PATH on 10.7.3:

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Saiwing Yeung
On Apr 4, 2012, at 9:19 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: On Apr 4, 2012, at 11:16, Saiwing Yeung wrote: oh... I didn't know that. I just took a look in my /usr/local, and found a whole bunch of stuff for texlive, and then various programs that I remember installing. is there a recommended place

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Rainer Müller
On 04/04/2012 06:26 PM, Jeremy Lavergne wrote: I use Linux extensively for my servers and Macs when I'm trying to be a human. /usr/local has been around for quite a while in the *nix world (it's even in the default $PATH), and I use it a little on the Macs. I can't think of what the problem

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Glenn English
On Apr 4, 2012, at 10:27 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: Because /usr/local is searched by default by the compiler and we do not know how to turn that off, MacPorts ports might try to link with libraries you've installed in /usr/local. Ah! Thank you; that makes sense. I'll try to stay away from

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Ryan Schmidt
On Apr 4, 2012, at 12:42, Glenn English wrote: On Apr 4, 2012, at 10:27 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: Because /usr/local is searched by default by the compiler and we do not know how to turn that off, MacPorts ports might try to link with libraries you've installed in /usr/local. Ah!

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Phil Dobbin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 04/04/2012 18:30, Saiwing Yeung wrote: On Apr 4, 2012, at 9:19 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: On Apr 4, 2012, at 11:16, Saiwing Yeung wrote: oh... I didn't know that. I just took a look in my /usr/local, and found a whole bunch of stuff for texlive,

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Phil Dobbin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 04/04/2012 19:40, Phil Dobbin wrote: On 04/04/2012 18:30, Saiwing Yeung wrote: On Apr 4, 2012, at 9:19 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: On Apr 4, 2012, at 11:16, Saiwing Yeung wrote: oh... I didn't know that. I just took a look in my /usr/local, and

How to run a sql script sql script on mysql5

2012-04-04 Thread Michael Parchet
Hello, I have install the mysql5 port. I do a secure installation whith only the root user and a password. So noe I wold like to run a sql script to create a database. I have tried the following command but this last has no effect sudo mysql5 -u root -p password script.sql Can you help me

Re: How to run a sql script sql script on mysql5

2012-04-04 Thread Bradley Giesbrecht
On Apr 4, 2012, at 12:14 PM, Michael Parchet wrote: Hello, I have install the mysql5 port. I do a secure installation whith only the root user and a password. So noe I wold like to run a sql script to create a database. I have tried the following command but this last has no effect

Re: How to run a sql script sql script on mysql5

2012-04-04 Thread Lawrence Velázquez
On Apr 4, 2012, at 3:14 p.m., Michael Parchet wrote: I have install the mysql5 port. I do a secure installation whith only the root user and a password. So noe I wold like to run a sql script to create a database. Are you making a local database? Have you installed mysql5-server? vq

Re: How to run a sql script sql script on mysql5

2012-04-04 Thread Michael Parchet
Le 04.04.12 21:37, Lawrence Velázquez a écrit : On Apr 4, 2012, at 3:14 p.m., Michael Parchet wrote: I have install the mysql5 port. I do a secure installation whith only the root user and a password. So noe I wold like to run a sql script to create a database. Are you making a local

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Jeremy Lavergne
I might not be opposed to MacPorts printing a warning if anything is found in /usr/local/{bin,etc,include,lib,libexec,man,sbin,share,var}. But I would probably only want to print that if a port actually failed to build. It sounds very reasonable to check if there's anything in /usr/local

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Jan Stary
The more I think about it, the more I tend to this conclusion: Using /opt/local as the default prefix is an attempt to save the user from himself, which is pointless. Any other benefits it has would also be present if the default prefix was /usr/local. Please bare with me and wait with the

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Jeremy Lavergne
/usr/local is not a viable choice because some software (especially auto* tools from Gnu) look in /usr/local as a default location, which means MacPorts can't be easily isolated when needed. I want to kindly ask the person who wrote this to elaborate, and be as specific as can be: what

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Phil Dobbin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 04/04/2012 22:01, Jan Stary wrote: [...] You'd probably have to create the directory in /Users/yourname Huh? That's my $HOME, which obviously exists already. I was referring to the /bin directory not $HOME `PATH=$PATH:$HOME/bin` That

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Jeremy Lavergne
`PATH=$PATH:$HOME/bin` That puts it last in the path, which is probably not what you intended. Your logic there defeats me... Just standard concatenation: it was appended at the end. This doesn't much matter though, since the original thread has nothing to do with $PATH. smime.p7s

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Phil Dobbin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 04/04/2012 22:15, Jeremy Lavergne wrote: `PATH=$PATH:$HOME/bin` That puts it last in the path, which is probably not what you intended. Your logic there defeats me... Just standard concatenation: it was appended at the end. This

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Jan Stary
On Apr 04 16:05:27, Jeremy Lavergne wrote: /usr/local is not a viable choice because some software (especially auto* tools from Gnu) look in /usr/local as a default location, which means MacPorts can't be easily isolated when needed. I want to kindly ask the person who wrote this to

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Stephen Langer
On Apr 4, 2012, at 5:01 PM, Jan Stary wrote: What other various installations, exactly? Nobody uses more then one port system on a given machine (not that know about any other beside macports and fink). So whatever the macports prefix, it will not stomp on any other port system's

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Jeremy Lavergne
You keep saying that: the software that magically finds its way to /usr/local. What do you even mean by that? The user installed it there; that's about the only way something gets into /usr/local. The user is typically unaware of where packaged software is installed. You can look at our

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Dominik Reichardt
On 04.04.2012, at 23:20, Jan Stary wrote: On Apr 04 16:05:27, Jeremy Lavergne wrote: /usr/local is not a viable choice because some software (especially auto* tools from Gnu) look in /usr/local as a default location, which means MacPorts can't be easily isolated when needed. I want to

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Brandon Allbery
Too many outright errors. Please. On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 17:01, Jan Stary h...@stare.cz wrote: /opt/local was chosen so as to avoid stomping on other various installations What other various installations, exactly? Any software not part of a package system such as Apple's own, Fink,

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Daniel J. Luke
On Apr 4, 2012, at 5:01 PM, Jan Stary wrote: Using /opt/local as the default prefix is an attempt to save the user from himself, [snip] There are lots of good reasons to use a $prefix other than /usr/local If you care, you can probably find all of the reasoning in the mailing list archives

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Jan Stary
On Apr 04 23:32:26, Dominik Reichardt wrote: On 04.04.2012, at 23:20, Jan Stary wrote: On Apr 04 16:05:27, Jeremy Lavergne wrote: /usr/local is not a viable choice because some software (especially auto* tools from Gnu) look in /usr/local as a default location, which means MacPorts

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Dominik Reichardt
On 04.04.2012, at 23:48, Jan Stary wrote: On Apr 04 23:32:26, Dominik Reichardt wrote: On 04.04.2012, at 23:20, Jan Stary wrote: On Apr 04 16:05:27, Jeremy Lavergne wrote: /usr/local is not a viable choice because some software (especially auto* tools from Gnu) look in /usr/local as a

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Jan Stary
It's the usual Unixy place for third party software, a point you yourself made at some point; how is it you are now unaware of it? Oh I am aware of it, and specifically mention it about two lines below the point where you cut my message, as you know. Nobody uses more then one port system on

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Jan Stary
No it didn't magically ended up there. You installed it there. And you were told before you installed it there that it will end up there. I didn't say that, I said *magically*. Of course I know there was no magic involved. Phew... Jesus, I am not implying you think it was magic. I am

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Bradley Giesbrecht
On Apr 4, 2012, at 3:39 PM, Jan Stary wrote: No it didn't magically ended up there. You installed it there. And you were told before you installed it there that it will end up there. I didn't say that, I said *magically*. Of course I know there was no magic involved. Phew... Jesus, I

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Jan Stary
The user does not know where they installs things. Packaged installers, the users just click through. The user is typically unaware of where packaged software is installed. You can look at our mounds of trouble tickets that were caused by this specific reason. The user simply ran some

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Chris Jones
Hi, On Apr 04 11:26:14, Jeremy Lavergne wrote: /usr/local is horrible because it takes precedence over everything else on your system Yes, it takes precedence. That's the point: to have a place where things are supposed to be installed. Why does it make /usr/local horrible? How would that

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Chris Jones
Hi, Yes, I understand this. What I don't understand is how having /opt/local as a prefix makes this better than having /usr/local (or whatever else). Its just statistics. /usr/local is a relatively common place for third party applications to dump stuff, so usin git you are likely to

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Gregory Shenaut
This ksh command line: for y in ${PATH//:/ } ; do for x in $y/* ; do if [[ -r $x ]] ; then strings $x | grep -sq /usr/local print `basename $x` ; fi ; done ; done | sort -u | wc -l produces 123 hits on my system. The same command, but using /opt/local, produces 834. Only 28 commands are in

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Brandon Allbery
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 18:19, Jan Stary h...@stare.cz wrote: It's the usual Unixy place for third party software, a point you yourself made at some point; how is it you are now unaware of it? Oh I am aware of it, and specifically mention it about two lines below the point where you cut my

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Brandon Allbery
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 19:08, Chris Jones jon...@hep.phy.cam.ac.uk wrote: MacPorts does provide a means to set its installation root, so if *you* really want to use /usr/local you can. Similarly you could use /opt/I/bet/no/one/will/ever/find/this/ to be completely safe … Actually, I think it

Re: /usr/local question

2012-04-04 Thread Frank J. R. Hanstick
Hello, There is a problem with having many locations for third party installed software and that is dependencies during build and paths to those dependencies. Sometimes the problem also crops up when applications are opened depending on how the library links are sought (this is very very