On Tue, 2011-07-26 at 08:45 -0430, Robert Marcano wrote: > On 07/26/2011 08:36 AM, Genes MailLists wrote: > > On 07/26/2011 08:03 AM, Misha Shnurapet wrote: > >> 26.07.2011, 18:34, "Andrew Haley"<a...@redhat.com>: > >>> On 26/07/11 10:22, Misha Shnurapet wrote: > >>> > >>>> Since F15 ~/bin has been added to PATH, and commands that are > >>>> supposed to run user scripts will work without changing into that > >>>> directory. Meanwhile, ~/.local/bin isn't used. I'd like to propose > >>>> that it is also added because technically it is ~/bin's brother. > >>> > >>> I've never heard of ~/.local/bin . Are there many people who use > >>> this? ~/bin is common. > >> > >> ~/.local/bin has been there by default. > >> > >> Unlike ~/bin, which is in PATH though not even created. > >> > > > > Where in the path do the user 'bin' elements appear in the path? > > In /etc/skel/.bash_profile they are added to the end and I think that is ok > > PATH=$PATH:$HOME/.local/bin:$HOME/bin > > Never knew about ~/.local/bin my .bash_profile is really old from the > time where the default was only ~/bin
Can someone explain (or point to) the rationale appending these to PATH rather than prepending them? I would have expected user binaries to supersede system ones. -- Braden McDaniel <bra...@endoframe.com> -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
