Subject: Re: Reimplementing the /usr/contrib directory hierarchy
To: Igor Sobrado <email@example.com>
From: Andrew Brown <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 01/02/2003 10:22:00
>Exceptions to this rule.
>Some packages that ARE NOT under the control of the NetBSD Foundation
>should stay in /usr. Most important examples are GCC (gcc, g++),
>GNU roff, and others. Common sense shows the packages that can be
>moved to /usr/contrib, but looking at the 4.4BSD/Lite filesystem
>hierarchy will clearly show how to proceed.
from examining my source tree, i see
% ls crypto/dist dist gnu/dist
CVS heimdal kame krb4 openssl ssh
CVS bind cdk ipf ntp tcpdump
am-utils bzip2 dhcp nawk pdisk
CVS diffutils map-mbone sendmail
README.toolchain gawk mrinfo tar
autoconf gettext mrouted texinfo
bc grep mtrace toolchain
cvs groff postfix
i can't see how any of those (except for the ones i don't use :) would
be better served by putting them in /usr/contrib. the only result i
can see is massive confusion and resentment. anyone who wants to use
them will be happier finding them in /usr/bin, and anyone who wants to
know which tools are from whom can easily look in the source tree. if
your intent is merely to separate netbsd controlled material from
non-netbsd controlled material, then in order for it to have an
effect, it must be a steadfast rule with no exceptions. i'd be
opposed to moving lots of stuff. i think it (whichever program we
decide to talk about) makes much more sense living where it already
>/usr/contrib is the place where compression tools (except compress),
>shell script interpreters, and nmh reside.
it seems to me that there's not really that much that we could
reasonably put there.
|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|
email@example.com * "ah! i see you have the internet
firstname.lastname@example.org (Andrew Brown) that goes *ping*!"
email@example.com * "information is power -- share the wealth."