Re: Debian BSD.. cool idea!
On Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 01:58:49AM -0600, Dan Potter wrote:
> I think this is just Another One Of Those Differences between Debian
> and BSD (or perhaps Linux distros in general and BSD). I think the BSD
> equivalent for the Debian /usr/local would probably be /opt, as someone
> mentioned offhand earlier.
Perhaps. I guess we consider /opt to be for packages from commercial
vendors -- probably not for something downloaded off the net,
compiled from source yourself. But /opt and /usr/local are both
completely under the admin's control, and not the vendor's.
> I still personally think that Debian's way makes for a more integrated
> system with less package hassle, but that's just me (and a number of other
> people, I gather). Of course that's why I'd like to see a Debian based on
> a FreeBSD kernel instead of a FreeBSD distro with dpkg slapped on top.
I personally think Debian's arrangement is the only sensible one.
The distinction /usr versus /usr/local on BSD is IMHO rather artificial;
they're all vendor supplied, just that one is the base system and
the other is not.
cheers
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB. CCs of replies on mailing lists are welcome.
Reply to: