FreeBSD has always placed /usr/local/X after /usr/X in the default PATH. AFAICT that convention began with SVN revision 37 "Initial import of 386BSD 0.1 othersrc/etc". Why is that? It would make sense to me that /usr/local/X should come first. That way programs installed from ports can override FreeBSD's defaults. Is there a good reason for this convention, or is it just inertia? -Alan
- PATH: /usr/local before or after /... Alan Somers
- Re: PATH: /usr/local before o... Michael Gmelin
- Re: PATH: /usr/local befo... Rodney W. Grimes
- Re: PATH: /usr/local before o... Cameron Katri via freebsd-current
- Re: PATH: /usr/local befo... Alan Somers
- Re: PATH: /usr/local ... Cameron Katri via freebsd-current
- Re: PATH: /usr/local befo... David Chisnall
- Re: PATH: /usr/local before o... Ian Lepore
- Re: PATH: /usr/local befo... Alan Somers
- Re: PATH: /usr/local befo... Willem Jan Withagen via freebsd-current