Subject: Re: /usr/pkgsrc
To: Robert V. Baron <email@example.com>
From: Eric Haszlakiewicz <haszlaki@UAccess.NET>
Date: 02/23/1998 22:37:16
> I was wondering. Why do we install imported code into /usr/pkg?
> Most code thinks it lives in /usr/local. So for example, pulling
> in ical is a pain, since it thinks tcl/tk is in /usr/local and we
> have it in /usr/pkg.
I believe there was a discussion earlier about this. The general
idea was that /usr/local is conceptually supposed to be for things that are
truly local to a given machine, stuff which isn't part of the OS. The
package collection is not part of the standard OS utils but it's not really
not part of it either, so it gets its own directory.
You can change where it gets installed though. Set enviro variable
PREFIX to where you want it to go before installing.
> And while we are at it. Why do we put ports
> into /usr/pkgsrc vs /usr/ports?
Because a port is a version of NetBSD(...etc...) that runs
on a particular hardware.
I think that since all the other stuff with packages goes in
/usr/pkg the sources should go in "/usr/pkg/src", as source for /usr/local
stuff goes in /usr/local/src, etc... Is there some reason for it being