Nate Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> types:
> I ran mostly DEC boxes until the early 90s, which had all software
> installed in /usr/bin or /usr/local/bin.

Well, I ran DEC boxes for Dec (at WSE) back in the late 80s and early
90s, and don't remember anything being in /usr/local that I didn't
drag of the net (or write myself) and install there, on either VAXen
or MIPS boxes.

> > By your own admission, /usr/local wasn't used on v7. So the discussion
> > should turn to when BSD started seeing prebuilt vendor packages to
> > install in /usr/local.
> Late '80s on DEC boxes running Ultrix (which one could argue is one of
> the earliest commercial 'vendor' BSD unices).  I don't consider Solaris
> a BSD unix, so it using /opt isn't a valid point, which makes the whole
> concept of '/opt' for BSD packages a moot point. :)

I wish people would quite acting like moving packages out of
/usr/local meant going to something like /opt. I don't think anyone in
their right mind would suggest that.

> Probably the same time-frame for SunOS, although I didn't have
> experience with it until the early 90's.  However, if necessary, I can
> try and dig out installation docs for some software which ask to have
> the stuff unpacked in /usr/local.

I'd certainly be interested in that.

Of course, as you yourself said, the argument about tradition is a
sideline. The real issue is that ports/packages have one source, and
things that may *not* have a mechanism to move them out of /usr/local
(however badly broken) have another some of us want - quite
legitimately - want to treat those two things differently, and
packages using a directory name that has an established use makes that


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to