On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 09:16:26AM +0200, Bernd Sieker wrote:

> It could also be in your $HOME. I can think of other ways to handle
> it.

Or it could be in /bin, where it belongs... ;)  Besides, $HOME for root
is often /root, and I might not want binaries stored there when there
is a perfectly good /bin directory.

Sorry, I think shells should go there.  However, note that I never
suggested that pkgsrc should put them there.

> In earlier installations I sometimes had a statically linked tcsh in
> /bin, but I agree with "der Mouse" that we should not start anything
> like that. 

As an official part of the packages, of course not.  But it should be,
and is, an option.  Most other software I don't really care about,
just tcsh, mainly because I don't like csh.

The only other major change I make to package layout is data directories,
because I don't like putting that in /usr/pkg.  Ideally, speaking for
myself, I want /usr on down to be relatively static.

> This clear distinction has already been mingled with the default
> X11BASE, which is the same directory of the X11 core installation,
> which some might regard as part of the core installation, since
> sysinst allows to install it. I am thinking about setting X11BASE to
> something else to have a sharp line there, too.

I have mixed feelings about X11.  On the one hand, having specific
core-setup is nice.  However, I don't like having X binaries scattered.

I also don't like a package system being used an excuse for scattering
things like this for the reason: "don't worry about it, the package
database will keep track of it all".

-- 
UNIX/Perl/C/Pizza__________________________________shannon@widomaker.com