Re: /usr/local (again)
>I sort of thought we had settled on (a). Although I would normally
>expect /usr/*local* to be local, I don't see any reason not to be
>friendly to unusual setups especially in the case of (c) where it
>doesn't cost anything, assuming the base package puts in a reasonable
>default.
Well, in my case it is local, as in "local to the site". On many unix
installations it is not uncommon for /usr/local to be a nfs mount.
Besides, aren't we supposed not make assumptions about /usr/local at
all (according to FSSTND/FHS)?
--
Richard W Kaszeta Graduate Student/Sysadmin
bofh@bofh.me.umn.edu University of MN, ME Dept
http://www.menet.umn.edu/~kaszeta
Reply to: