Re: profile and /usr/local/bin in PATH
On Tue, Nov 27, 2001 at 01:48:14PM -0500, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> The default profile on a Debian system puts '/usr/local/bin' as the first
> element in the PATH list. This causes several things to not work as
> desired.
And there are good reasons why that makes sense. The typical
situation is that some binary in the distribution doesn't behave in
exactly the way the syasadmin wants, so the sysadmin can override it
with a local binary (or script) in /us/rlocal.
I'm not saying that the situations you describe don't also make sense,
by the way ;-) In my rather limited expereience, having /usr/local
first is mor useful, though.
> In order to make this work as expected, I would like to put /usr/local/bin
> at the end of the path list. Can anyone suggest a compelling reason why I
> shouldn't do this? Is there any Debian "feature" that depends upon this
> path structure?
I can't think of anything off-hand which depends upon it: after all
the distribution leaves /usr/local alone.
However, I would be inclined not to move /usr/local's position in
$PATH. Rather, I'd suggest a new hierarchy /usr/localfb (fb ==
fallback) which goes last in the path, to complement /usr/local which
goes first.
YMMV.
Jules
Reply to: