28 Nov
2003
28 Nov
'03
4:07 p.m.
On Friday 28 November 2003 16:01, Florian Schmidt wrote:
On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 12:39:31 -0600
Billy Biggs <vektor(a)dumbterm.net> wrote:
but confuse the user:
Common situation.
new cool amazing program/version is out, we download it, no packages yet so we
compile
and it goes to /usr/local.
Some months later someone packaged it and the user says "good i can apt-get
it"
and the program installs in /usr, while the old one is in /usr/local.
Result: new program doesnt work, as /usr/local has priority, and the user is
confused. He probably just removed the sources as they were taking space
and cant -or doesnt know- about make uninstall.
as paul says, opt/ is a fine solution for this, as everything just symlinks,
but it's sad that it never took off.
Cheers
Juan Linietsky
It's really awkward that autoconf-based
tools default to /usr/local
since many users of my applications often use it and end up with
non-FHS compliant silly directories like /usr/local/etc and
/usr/local/var which should never exist. Putting everything under
$PREFIX is really a compromise by the autoconf folks, and using
/usr/local seems to be another compromise partly to help separate GNU
stuff from native stuff(think installing bash on a Solaris machine).
I acyually like it this way. In debian, at least, no package will ever
install anything to /usr/local, so installing stuff to /usr/local will
at least garantee to not confuse the package management system.