On Sat, Nov 18, 2006 at 02:35:27PM +0100, Igor Sobrado wrote:
> I suppose that configuration files were on a different directory,
> as in NetBSD. As both NetBSD and OpenBSD are using the same tools
> to manage ports/packages, and I am certainly accustomed to
> /usr/pkg/etc on NetBSD, I supposed it was an error on these
> packages.
OpenBSD and NetBSD do not use the same tools to manage ports and
packages.
> As I said, it is a certainly unusual behaviour and it is not
> described on the pkg_* manual pages (though!). As I did not find
> a comment on this behaviour on pkg_add(1), but there are detailed
> notes on the use of /usr/ports, /usr/local, /var/db/pkg and so on
> I supposed I did a mistake installing the packages.
Look at hier(7):
/usr/ Contains the majority of user utilities and applications.
[...]
local/ Local executables, libraries, etc.
Also, look at packages(7):
[...]
Some packages installation scripts will also create new configuration
files in /etc, or need some working directory under /var to function cor-
rectly (e.g., squid, or mysql).
This is well documented; as you noted, there's even a helpful FAQ
entry.
> I read a lot of documentation on the utilities for managing
> packages on NetBSD, where /usr/pkg/etc is used. I expected the
> same behaviour on OpenBSD.
Why would you expect that?
> I just asked because this behaviour is not documented on the man
> pages and it is certainly different to the way pkg_* works on
> NetBSD (where there is a different /etc for the packages).
Assuming OpenBSD works just like NetBSD will make things hard for
you. Read the FAQ and man pages, and trust pkg_info(1).
--
o--------------------------{ Will Maier }--------------------------o
| web:.......http://www.lfod.us/ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
*------------------[ BSD Unix: Live Free or Die ]------------------*
