On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 05:45:07PM -0600, Mike Meyer wrote:
Others have noted that the script it installs in $(PREFIX)/bin/applix
has /usr/local wired into it, though.
Yes, I will bring that up tomarrow with the BSDi developer putting
together the next revision of it. Maybe I should have
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 06:56:13PM -0700, Wes Peters wrote:
Do you understand why NetBSD Packages (ie, the system they took from us)
install into /usr/pkg by default rather than /usr/local ?
Yes, but that doesn't mean I agree with it. In fact, I find it slighly
bizarre. I dislike
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 10:41:24PM -0700, Warner Losh wrote:
: To the extent that NetBSD *forces* the local administrator to use
: /usr/pkg, I find it contains the same deficiency.
I'd point out that make install in the pkgsrc tree installs into
/usr/pkg too. So NetBSD doesn't
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 11:33:33PM -0600, Mike Meyer wrote:
The thing is, the package system has grown into something more than
that. It really is vendor-supplied and vendor-supported third party
software, and part of the distribution.
I can back this up. As someone that maintains over 120
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 11:44:36PM -0700, Nate Williams wrote:
Ahh, if we're limiting the discussio to 'OS vendor' software, then every
OS vendor I know installs its software in /usr/bin, and /usr/lib.
David hands Nate a freshly minted copy of BSD/OS 4.2, where he will see
/usr/contrib/ burned
David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] types:
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 11:33:33PM -0600, Mike Meyer wrote:
The thing is, the package system has grown into something more than
that. It really is vendor-supplied and vendor-supported third party
software, and part of the distribution.
I can back
David hands Nate a freshly minted copy of BSD/OS 4.2, where he will see
/usr/contrib/ burned on the CDROM (using an electron microscope of
course :-)).
Even Sun does this with it's 'OS vendor' tools.
Uhm.. not everything. Many optional pieces from Sun installs in /opt.
The SunPro
On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 08:14:47AM -0600, Mike Meyer wrote:
The problem is that the shared libraries aren't getting found when I
run the applix binary after a reboot.
Why do you say that? Where is the error message??
/usr/local/applix/axdata/axshlib are ELF shared objects. I haven't
David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] types:
On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 08:14:47AM -0600, Mike Meyer wrote:
The problem is that the shared libraries aren't getting found when I
run the applix binary after a reboot.
Why do you say that? Where is the error message??
I say that because 1) that was
On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 05:24:19PM -0600, Mike Meyer wrote:
At that point, you're running VistaSource's software, so they should
give you the details.
Then I'll just back out of trying to help figure out why many others can
run it outside of /usr/local.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL
David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] types:
On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 05:24:19PM -0600, Mike Meyer wrote:
At that point, you're running VistaSource's software, so they should
give you the details.
Then I'll just back out of trying to help figure out why many others can
run it outside of
David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] types:
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 11:42:37PM -0600, Mike Meyer wrote:
On the other hand, Applixware Office ships a precompiled package for
/usr/local, and doesn't like being installed anywhere else. Which
means I've got a couple of hundred megabytes being
Joe Kelsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] types:
Mike Meyer writes:
If memory serves (and it may not at this remove), /usr/local/bin
wasn't on my path until I started using VAXen, meaning there were few
or no packages installing in /usr/local on v6 v7 on the 11s.
If you remember v6 and v7, then
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 11:42:38AM -0600, Mike Meyer wrote:
Ports, on the other hand are installed in /usr/local or /usr/X11R6.
What happend to "that's what PREFIX is for"?
I was speaking about the default behaviour. If you want the port to
go somewhere other than /usr/local, PREFIX or
I think I finally understand what you are complaining about, and that
is that PREFIX is not honoured by all ports. If that is your
argument, then yes, obviously that should be fixed if possible. But
to say that installing ports into /usr/local is somehow wrong, I have
to disagree. This is
Mike Meyer writes:
Sure, the software in ports/packages aren't part of FreeBSD. Using
that to claim they should have the same status or treatment as locally
written or maintained software is a rationalization.
You are simply wrong in your characterization of /usr/local. As far
back as I
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 11:14:32AM -0800, Joe Kelsey wrote:
You are simply wrong in your characterization of /usr/local. As far
back as I can remember, /usr/local has been used for locally installed
[...]
Pfft. Everyone has their own way of organizing files. There is no
right or wrong.
Joe Kelsey writes:
When the BSD started, they tried to distinguish between /usr/local and
/usr/public, but that never took hold. Certainly, when GNU
distributions started, the FSF very quickly took up the then default
(from the long history of standardized distributions in the moderated
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 01:44:41PM -0500, Brian Dean wrote:
I think I finally understand what you are complaining about,
Maybe.
But to say that installing ports into /usr/local is somehow wrong, I
have to disagree.
Do you understand why NetBSD Packages (ie, the system they took from us)
Joe Kelsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] types:
Mike Meyer writes:
Sure, the software in ports/packages aren't part of FreeBSD. Using
that to claim they should have the same status or treatment as locally
written or maintained software is a rationalization.
You are simply wrong in your
David O'Brien writes:
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 11:22:17AM -0800, Joe Kelsey wrote:
Basically, /usr/local is for anything the local administration wants to
officially support. The ports use of this (and by extension,
pre-compiled ports (packages)) is thus completely justified.
Do
Joe Kelsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] types:
David O'Brien writes:
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 11:22:17AM -0800, Joe Kelsey wrote:
Basically, /usr/local is for anything the local administration wants to
officially support. The ports use of this (and by extension,
pre-compiled ports
Then again, your quoting of "packages" points up something else - I
never saw prepackaged binaries for v6 or v7.
I did on SysIII. As a matter of fact, the entire distribution was
bundled into separate packets (all of them installed in /usr). :(
Or BSD, for that matter. I never encounterd a
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 12:26:38PM -0800, Joe Kelsey wrote:
This thread is also about a completely separate issue, which is a
deficiency in the package command used on FreeBSD. The basic problem
with pkg_add et al., as opposed to, for instance, SVR4 pkgadd, is that
it does not allow the
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 01:51:25PM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 12:26:38PM -0800, Joe Kelsey wrote:
[snip]
To the extent that NetBSD *forces* the local administrator to use
/usr/pkg, I find it contains the same deficiency.
Nope. One can ``ln -s /usr/local
Crist J. Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] types:
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 01:51:25PM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 12:26:38PM -0800, Joe Kelsey wrote:
To the extent that NetBSD *forces* the local administrator to use
/usr/pkg, I find it contains the same deficiency.
Nope.
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 02:18:31PM -0800, Crist J. Clark wrote:
Nope. One can ``ln -s /usr/local /usr/pkg'' and get the behavior those
that like everything in one place prefers while still segregating stuff
for those that prefer it.
That makes no sense.
Yes it does.
The big argument
David O'Brien wrote:
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 01:44:41PM -0500, Brian Dean wrote:
I think I finally understand what you are complaining about,
Maybe.
But to say that installing ports into /usr/local is somehow wrong, I
have to disagree.
Do you understand why NetBSD Packages (ie,
Nate Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] types:
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
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Joe Kelsey writes:
: To the extent that NetBSD *forces* the local administrator to use
: /usr/pkg, I find it contains the same deficiency. If it does not force
: this, then perhaps FreeBSD should adopt it. I have never used NetBSD,
: so I cannot comment further on
Warner Losh [EMAIL PROTECTED] types:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nate Williams writes:
: I know that as recent as 3=4 years ago, Purify installed itself by
: default in /usr/local, on SunOS and Solaris. Lucid did this as well,
: although things start getting pretty fuzzy going back that
: I know that as recent as 3=4 years ago, Purify installed itself by
: default in /usr/local, on SunOS and Solaris. Lucid did this as well,
: although things start getting pretty fuzzy going back that far. :)
purify and the binary distributions of xemacs installed themselves
into
32 matches
Mail list logo
