Subject: Re: Name por packages dir (was: Re: xntpd)
To: None <current-users@NetBSD.ORG, tech-install@NetBSD.ORG>
From: Mike Long <>
List: current-users
Date: 01/05/1996 13:29:40
>Date: Fri, 5 Jan 1996 15:04:27 +0100
>From: "Jesus M. Gonzalez" <>

>1. I think we are beggining to have to much dirs in /usr. /usr/local
>is there, not much used by the usual O.S.s, is the place where symlinks
>are in this schema... So, I think /usr/local is better than /usr/pkgs
>(that will suppose having two places with non-OS things, for instance,
>when you are backing up, or when you are tarring thing for home...).

On the other hand, /usr/local may be a bad choice for a network with a
large number of systems, all of which can NFS mount each other's disks.
(This is the case where I work.)  I have a strong belief that
/usr/local should be *local*, not shared; hence I would put what you
call /usr/local/install elsewhere, and use rdist to update the
symlinks in /usr/local.  This is *my* personal choice; others should
be free to choose differently.

>2. I prefer install to pkgs (e.g., /usr/local/install to /usr/local/pkgs)
>because things to put there are *installed* packages.

The probability of finding one name everyone will like is small.
The actual name of the directory into which a package's files are
installed must be left as an option for the person running pkg_add.
Mike Long <> 
VLSI Design Engineer         finger for PGP public key
Analog Devices, CPD Division          CCBF225E7D3F7ECB2C8F7ABB15D9BE7B
Norwood, MA 02062 USA       (eq (opinion 'ADI) (opinion 'mike)) -> nil