Verily did "Michael Graff" write:

>>Agreed.  So, for packages, if I'm going to provide them (and be allowed
>>to provide them), they're going to be /usr/local.  :>

>>Just a little reminder, there are -no- files (i.e. "find . -type f") in
>>my /usr/local/{bin,etc,lib,man} trees, but instead, symlinks back to
>>/usr/local/install/<app>/{bin,etc,lib,man}.

> Um, why put that restriction in there?  The symlinks could be
> installed just about anywhere.

I'm not sure that I follow... you can put them anywhere and throw symlinks
in /usr/local/{bin,lib,man} that point back to wherever they really are.

Unfortunately, most apps want a hardcoded path of some sort (e.g. [x]less
and the .help file).  For the others that don't, they can be placed
anywhere, I typically don't go out of my way to hardcode absolute
paths in binaries.

> I *really* like the idea of a /usr/pkgs/foo structure with symlinks.
> That way if you remove a package it is a directory and anything
> symlinked to it.  And it allows one directory to be sup'd or nfs
> mounted and packages installed as desired.

You remove a package and it's symlinks with one "rm -rf"?  Where does your
path point to for executables?

-- Rob
----------------------------------------
Internet: windsor@pobox.com      Life: Rob@Sunnyvale.California.USA.Earth
"Da Web": http://pobox.com/~windsor/

"Ain't much distance 'tween a pat on the back and a kick in the pants."
    -- David Lee Roth (1990), `The Dogtown Shuffle'