On Tue, 15 Dec 1998, Greg A. Woods wrote:

: There's a subtle mis-conception in there...  /usr isn't designed to be
: shared amongst multiple machines of a single architecture.  It's
: designed to be shared (in conjunction with /usr/share) amongst multiple
: heterogenous machines.

Actually, /usr *is* meant to be shareable among machines of the same
MACHINE_ARCH.  We're trying to go through a good deal of work to make sure
that is the case.  Disk may be `cheap', but sharing is cheaper.

: However I think the original proposal's idea of /pkg was much better in
: that (if I remember correctly) it made it possible to have packages
: install in /bin and /sbin (eg. if $PREFIX is set to / or if /pkg -> ..)
: too

No.  If something wants to replace system binaries in /bin and /sbin, its
behavior is spelled out here, via the move-and-symlink item.

: without having to go to a whole lot of extra steps which will invite
: package developers to make incorrect assumptions about the structure of
: the system outside of $PREFIX and what they're permitted to do out there.

What incorrect assumptions?  Pkg developers are allowed to make many
assumptions about what resides in /usr/{bin,sbin,libexec,...}.

: Let's decide once and for all that either package config files go in
: $PREFIX/etc or in /etc.  One or the other.  And remember that if you set
: $PREFIX=/usr then you get 

.../usr/etc.  (Cut-off?)

They go in /etc, and some people want to share many config files.  Hence the
proposal.

: Perhaps one concession:  /etc/pkg -> $PREFIX/pkg/etc

So that pkgified stuff uses different config files than `out of the box'
stuff?

: Put them under $PREFIX/sbin (they *are* meant to be run by hand too!)
: and put the real daemon binary in $PREFIX/libexec.

Um, they shouldn't go directly under $PREFIX/sbin - talk about `littering
namespaces'.

-- 
-- Todd Vierling (Personal tv@pobox.com; Bus. todd_vierling@xn.xerox.com)