> -----Original Message----- > From: tclug-list-bounces at mn-linux.org > [mailto:tclug-list-bounces at mn-linux.org]On Behalf Of Dan Rue > Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 3:53 PM > To: Mike Miller > Cc: tclug-list at mn-linux.org > Subject: Re: [tclug-list] FreeBSD coherence > > > On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 03:26:53PM -0600, Mike Miller wrote: > > On Tue, 18 Dec 2007, Dan Rue wrote: > > > > > >> One nice thing about all of this from my (the admin's) perspective, is > >> that FreeBSD's base config files live in /etc, and ALL third party > >> configurations live in /usr/local/etc. In fact, all third party > >> ports/packages get installed to /usr/local. No matter how badly you > >> hose up your box, it is safe to rm -rf /usr/local/ and (and /var/db/pkg > >> and maybe one or two other spots) and start over. > > > > Can't things also be installed on a Linux system so that they > are entirely > > within /usr/local? That's what I usually do with > > > > ./configure prefix=/usr/local > > > > But that is the typical default path, so the prefix is usually not > > specified. I like your idea but I don't see why it can't be > done in Linux > > too. Maybe it's a lot easier to pull it off in FreeBSD. > > > > With respect, I think you missed the point. > > Sure, it's possible to do these things in Linux. It's an open source > OS, you can do whatever you want. But in FreeBSD, it's not only > default, it's very strict and the same no matter who's maintaining the > machines (unless they go out of their way to break it, that is). > > So if linux packages by default go in /usr/local, what goes in /? I > know linux configs always go to /etc. I imagine some packages will > install to /bin, and some to /usr/local/bin? Is it just ad-hoc based on > the mood of the maintainer? This is what I mean by having a *strict* > hierarchy. A freebsd port maintainer would get beat if they installed > something to /etc, or to /bin, or to /lib, .. etc. > > Dan Seem both feasible and desirable to make some sort of after-the-fact "rule checker" for Linux to self-enforce such a discipline and detect when something new is contrary. Might need some heuristics in any case, but that tool would preserve the option to take exception as well as the check for anomalies. I think I'd prefer the rule checker since scope and completeness become verifiable and not just an "implied mystique" of the OS. Chuck