On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 12:18:25 -0400
"Greg A. Woods" <woods@planix.com> wrote:

> At Tue, 25 Sep 2007 09:15:27 -0500 (CDT), Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> Subject: Re: Installing local packages and NetBSD guide
> > 
> > On Tue, 25 Sep 2007, Magnus Eriksson wrote:
> > 
> > > >> So shouldnt man hier mention /usr/local ?
> > > 
> > > Hm, it does: (at least on my system)
> > > 
> > >                  local/    local executables, libraries, etc.
> > 
> > That was removed almost five years ago.
> 
> The description of /usr/local should _NOT_ have been removed from
> hier(7).
> 
> > ----------------------------
> > revision 1.49
> > date: 2002/12/20 06:39:55;  author: lukem;  state: Exp;  lines: +1
> > -15 Remove /usr/local (and children) from the base distribution; we
> > shouldn't be creating directories or modifying permissions under
> > there.
> > 
> > (/usr/local/* is still retained in various default PATHs, for
> > convenience) ----------------------------
> 
> That commit comment does not really give any valid justification for
> removing mention of /usr/local and its contents from hier(7).
> 
> (It may have been valid justification for removal from the mtree
> files, but not from the hier(7) manual page!  Even the final caveat
> about PATH settings suggests /usr/local should still be documented
> properly!)
> 
> 
> > I think it should be added back with a note about its use.
> 
> Indeed.
> 
> Anyone managing a system and hoping to give it some general likeness
> to zillions of other systems out there in the world (with perhaps the
> exception of systems using FreBSD's "ports" package management system
> and its default settings where they have blindly confused everyone),
> e.g. for the purpose of having it conform to the likely expectations
> of the administrator who will follow in his or her footsteps, will
> want to use /usr/local as the hierarchy start-point for local
> additions to their system (or site-wide shared local hierarchy).
> 
> In any case hier(7) is not only a description of the base system, but
> also a guide to the administrator and as such it should document a
> suggested layout for locally added files and subsystems.
> 

I strongly agree with all of these points.  In fact,
/usr/local/{bin,sbin,include,...} should be part of the defaults
used by NetBSD in all contexts.  It's the best way to separate local
changes from what was shipped by the distribution.

		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb