[ On Tue, March 25, 1997 at 16:41:14 (-0500), Bill Sommerfeld wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: DEC uses NetBSD 
>
> What's the difference between /opt and /usr/opt?  If there isn't any,
> why reinvent the wheel differently?

Nothing in particular so far as I'm concerned.  The *BSD way seems to
prefer putting stuff under /usr (eg. /usr/local, /usr/contrib, etc.),
while SysVr4 started with /opt.  I too prefer /opt, /contrib, and
/local, but it really doesn't make much difference, other than the
asymmetry.  My own logic has the flaw that it would be extremely
unlikely one would ever mount /local without wanting to mount /usr, etc.

BTW, I usually prefer a more complete separation of things too, i.e. I
completely mirror /usr in /local, with /local/etc, /local/share and
/local/share/man, /local/libexec, /local/sbin, etc.  I often separate
out the GNU stuff too, if it's installed, because of the extreme
duplication of functionality possible with /gnu/bin and even /gnu/sbin,
/gnu/libexec, etc.  I've been known to keep the asymmetry of /local/gnu
too.

-- 
							Greg A. Woods

+1 416 443-1734			VE3TCP			robohack!woods
Planix, Inc. <woods@planix.com>; Secrets Of The Weird <woods@weird.com>