Subject: Re: why separate system and pkg hierarchies? (was: /usr/pkg/etc/rc.d/*)
To: NetBSD-current Discussion List <>
From: Sean J. Schluntz <>
List: current-users
Date: 03/18/2003 15:59:24
In message <>, "Greg A. Woods" writes:
>[ On Tuesday, March 18, 2003 at 21:52:40 (+0100), Jaka Jejcic wrote: ]
>> Subject: Re: /usr/pkg/etc/rc.d/*
>> But it is bad practice for sys-admins who want their
>> sistem as clean as possible.
>Why do you think it is bad practice to mix add-on packages into the
>"system" hierarchies?  What justification do you have for making the
>life of your users more difficult (as you seem to agree this will do)?

I have a question for you:

How does putting the packages in /usr/pkg make anything harder
on the users?  Don't you supply the users with default shell files
which have the path in them already?  If the path is there a user
doesn't care where the binary is. All the users care about is whether
or not the app works when the command is typed.

Now, as a sysadmin I don't like the /etc/rc.d & /usr/pkg/etc/rc.d 
thing, there are name collisions which mess things up (sendmail/sendmail
the first to launch is the winner?!?!).  But I also don't mind
them being in the pkgsrc tree. I think they should just be named
appropriatly to the use (which is more up to the maintaner of
the app than to the pkgsrc system itself).

Also, I have a reason to keep the binaries seperate, directory bloat.
Have you actually taken count of how many binaries you would end up
with if you put them all in the same dir on a heavily used box?
I (for one) am happy with the /usr/bin, /usr/local/bin, /usr/X11/bin,
/usr/pkg/bin thing.  I have also not gotten one single complaint 
from any of the users of my systems, ever, since I provide them
with profiles that work with the system that had to do with the
location of files (naming, use of, version, that I have had complaints
on, but never location).