Re: profile and /usr/local/bin in PATH
On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, Jules Bean wrote:
> 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.
Or: dpkg --purge <package> so that the /usr/local version will work ;-)
Clearly this is a "mindset" issue, and as usual my mind works backwards
from most folks...
> 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.
Depends on what you are using it for ;-)
> > 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.
Yea, right ;-)
> 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.
Seems to ;-)
_-_-_-_-_- Author of "Dwarf's Guide to Debian GNU/Linux" _-_-_-_-_-_-
_- aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (850) 656-9769 _-
_- Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road _-
_- e-mail: email@example.com Tallahassee, FL 32308 _-
_-_-_-_-_- Released under the GNU Free Documentation License _-_-_-_-
available at: http://www.polaris.net/~dwarf/