<html><body>
<p><font size="2" face="sans-serif"><br>
Andrew Hettinger<br>
<a href="http://Prominic.NET">http://Prominic.NET</a> || AHettinger@Prominic.NET<br>
Tel: 866.339.3169 (toll free) -or- +1.217.356.2888 x.110 (int'l) <br>
Fax: 866.372.3356 (toll free) -or- +1.217.356.3356 (int'l)<br>
</font><br>
<br>
<tt><font size="2">Peter Tribble <peter.tribble@gmail.com> wrote on 08/11/2011 02:42:41 AM:</font></tt><br>
<tt><font size="2">> <br>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 3:06 AM, Andrew M. Hettinger<br>
> <AHettinger@prominic.net> wrote:<br>
> > It was removed because there should be nothing in there. The documentation<br>
> > EXPLICITLY says that. This document also explicitly lists where additions<br>
> > should go (in /opt). This is not exactly a new standard.<br>
> ><br>
> > That said, why would you look for something in /usr/local?<br>
> <br>
> Because software often *is* installed there. Large amounts of open<br>
> source software will put themselves there by default. It's very common<br>
> and well known as a location for (non-system) software to be found.<br>
> <br>
> The standards say where the system should put stuff. Users can<br>
> put stuff wherever they like. In fact, /usr/local is a very good place<br>
> to put stuff precisely because you should be pretty well guaranteed<br>
> that you're not going to conflict with anything else.<br>
> </font></tt><br>
<br>
<tt><font size="2">In most cases, yes, in this case it's not just undefined but defined as either non-existent or a symlink to /opt/local.</font></tt><br>
<tt><font size="2"><br>
> >If we are just<br>
> > going to willy-nilly be adding directories, we should just have it search<br>
> > the entire filesystem, it's the only way be sure.<br>
> ><br>
> > If there is a desire to change from Solaris standards to the Linux Standard<br>
> > Base, so be it, but if we are going down that route, I'd like to see it<br>
> > explicitly made clear.<br>
> <br>
> This isn't about deviating from standards. The standards say where<br>
> the system should place stuff. No one is suggesting we start installing<br>
> our software in /usr/local. </font></tt><br>
<br>
<tt><font size="2">If the standard ignored it, that would be true. It doesn't.</font></tt><br>
<br>
<tt><font size="2">> Users are free to do their own thing, and<br>
> having cmake look in a well-known place where they're likely to have<br>
> installed software seems to me like a good thing. If this is a<br>
> "standards based" install, then it's a no-op. If the user is expecting<br>
> cmake to pick up the libwotsit they're just installed there and we<br>
> deliberately stop cmake from finding it, then they'll just get pissed off<br>
> and regard cmake (and the OS as a whole) as broken. Having it look<br>
> in /usr/local last (so it checks all the packaged system locations first)<br>
> would seem a reasonable precaution.<br>
> </font></tt><br>
<br>
<tt><font size="2">I think a better solution is to define /usr/local as a symlink to /opt/local in the install, and set cmake to look there. That is in line with what the standard says (it's practically recommended), allows cmake to find it (by searching for things in /opt/local, where they should be), and has the effect the user expects.</font></tt><br>
<tt><font size="2"><br>
> -- <br>
> -Peter Tribble<br>
> <a href="http://www.petertribble.co.uk/">http://www.petertribble.co.uk/</a> - <a href="http://ptribble.blogspot.com/">http://ptribble.blogspot.com/</a><br>
> <br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> oi-dev mailing list<br>
> oi-dev@openindiana.org<br>
> <a href="http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev">http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev</a><br>
</font></tt></body></html>