Re: Confusing error messages from shell image activation

[David O'Brien]

On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 09:46:46PM -0700, Nate Williams wrote:
> Fixing broken things is a good thing.  Your argument about moving it
> from /usr/local to show how broken is a good test procedure, but turning
> it into policy is something completely different.

Yes changing the policy is something different.  IMHO, it will never been
done -- way too much momentum behind it now.

BUT, I wish people would understand the basic premise and stop bringing
up what this and that used to 10 years ago.  People doing that are
*missing* the issue.  NetBSD got it right.  BSDi(BSD/OS) got it right.
 
> I think the 'tradition' of FreeBSD installing packages in /usr/local is
> enough to leave things the way they are, especially since non-broken
> packages allow you to install it somewhere else on *your* system.

Packages (ie, those Satoshi builds) no.  Building the port yourself, yes.

-- 
-- David  ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
          GNU is Not Unix / Linux Is Not UniX


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message