Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Place to install library of shell functions

1 view
Skip to first unread message

Michael Grünewald

unread,
Apr 5, 2011, 11:23:47 AM4/5/11
to
Dear FreeBSD users,


today I come to you with what seems to be somehow pedantic question:
where is the best place to install libraries of shell functions.

I read hier(4) carefully and it seems the correct place for this would
be somewhere under `/usr/local/share':

share/ architecture-independent files


On the base systems, many macros (make templates and groff macros) are
actually installed under /usr/share. However, the only library of shell
functions I am aware of is `/etc/rc.subr', that landed on this funny
location, probably to be pretty sure that this library is on the same
filesystem as the scripts under /etc/rc.d.

Several of the ports install shell scripts under `/usr/local/lib' that
hier(4) devotes to ``shared and archive ar(1)-type libraries''. These
shell scripts are:

> find /usr/local/lib -name '*.sh'
/usr/local/lib/tk8.5/tkConfig.sh
/usr/local/lib/seamonkey/run-mozilla.sh
/usr/local/lib/libxul/run-mozilla.sh
/usr/local/lib/rpm/convertrpmrc.sh
/usr/local/lib/rpm/find-lang.sh
/usr/local/lib/rpm/getpo.sh
/usr/local/lib/rpm/u_pkg.sh
/usr/local/lib/rpm/vpkg-provides.sh
/usr/local/lib/rpm/vpkg-provides2.sh
/usr/local/lib/firefox/run-mozilla.sh
/usr/local/lib/tcl8.5/tclConfig.sh
/usr/local/lib/thunderbird/run-mozilla.sh
/usr/local/lib/llvm-gcc-2.8/gcc/x86_64-portbld-freebsd8.2/4.2.1/install-tools/fixinc.sh

Two files (the `/usr/local/lib/tcl8.5/tclConfig.sh' one and the
`s/tcl/tk/g' one) are actually shell script libraries (defining a bunch
of variables), and all the others are ancillary scripts, that would
maybe better fit in `/usr/local/libexec'.

So, practical experience does not really second my a priori that these
files sould go under the `share' hierarchy and I would like to have your
opinion on this question.
--
Best Regards,
Michael
_______________________________________________
freebsd-...@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org"

Jerry McAllister

unread,
Apr 5, 2011, 11:51:32 AM4/5/11
to
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 05:23:47PM +0200, Michael Grünewald wrote:

> Dear FreeBSD users,
>
>
> today I come to you with what seems to be somehow pedantic question:
> where is the best place to install libraries of shell functions.
>
> I read hier(4) carefully and it seems the correct place for this would
> be somewhere under `/usr/local/share':
>
> share/ architecture-independent files

I would go with /usr/local/lib.

////jerry

Polytropon

unread,
Apr 5, 2011, 11:58:18 AM4/5/11
to
On Tue, 05 Apr 2011 17:23:47 +0200, Michael Grünewald <michaelg...@yahoo.fr> wrote:
> Dear FreeBSD users,
>
>
> today I come to you with what seems to be somehow pedantic question:
> where is the best place to install libraries of shell functions.

Depends. Are you interested in shell functions you install
from a port / package, or your own shell functions?

> I read hier(4) carefully and it seems the correct place for this would
> be somewhere under `/usr/local/share':
>
> share/ architecture-independent files

This structure usually serves the purpose of /usr/share,
but for software installed by ports or packages, as the
/usr/local/ subtree "duplicates" the system's structures
in many cases.

> On the base systems, many macros (make templates and groff macros) are
> actually installed under /usr/share. However, the only library of shell
> functions I am aware of is `/etc/rc.subr', that landed on this funny
> location, probably to be pretty sure that this library is on the same
> filesystem as the scripts under /etc/rc.d.

I guess that's the intention behind this decision. You'll
see that many things on FreeBSD are determined by a well-
intended thought, rather than an arbitrary "Oh, why don't
we just put it ... *throw a dice* ... here?"

> Several of the ports install shell scripts under `/usr/local/lib' that
> hier(4) devotes to ``shared and archive ar(1)-type libraries''. These
> shell scripts are:
>
> > find /usr/local/lib -name '*.sh'
> /usr/local/lib/tk8.5/tkConfig.sh
> /usr/local/lib/seamonkey/run-mozilla.sh
> /usr/local/lib/libxul/run-mozilla.sh
> /usr/local/lib/rpm/convertrpmrc.sh
> /usr/local/lib/rpm/find-lang.sh
> /usr/local/lib/rpm/getpo.sh
> /usr/local/lib/rpm/u_pkg.sh
> /usr/local/lib/rpm/vpkg-provides.sh
> /usr/local/lib/rpm/vpkg-provides2.sh
> /usr/local/lib/firefox/run-mozilla.sh
> /usr/local/lib/tcl8.5/tclConfig.sh
> /usr/local/lib/thunderbird/run-mozilla.sh
> /usr/local/lib/llvm-gcc-2.8/gcc/x86_64-portbld-freebsd8.2/4.2.1/install-tools/fixinc.sh
>
> Two files (the `/usr/local/lib/tcl8.5/tclConfig.sh' one and the
> `s/tcl/tk/g' one) are actually shell script libraries (defining a bunch
> of variables), and all the others are ancillary scripts, that would
> maybe better fit in `/usr/local/libexec'.

It depends on where the respective port maintainer want to
have them.

> So, practical experience does not really second my a priori that these
> files sould go under the `share' hierarchy and I would like to have your
> opinion on this question.

Many software is ported from Linux, so their structures,
or sometimes the lack of, is applied.

For example, I put _my_ stuff that is NOT managed by ports and
definitely does NOT belong to the system into an /opt subtree,
a Solaris-ism I'm "abusing": /opt/bin is in $PATH, so anything
system-wide executable is located there, and /opt/share
does contain non-executable shell scripts (e. g. those with
helper functionalities) or files with settings (that are
sourced by something else) - things that usually are not
called directly.


--
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...

Dan Nelson

unread,
Apr 5, 2011, 12:04:24 PM4/5/11
to
In the last episode (Apr 05), Michael Grünewald said:
> today I come to you with what seems to be somehow pedantic question: where
> is the best place to install libraries of shell functions.
>
> I read hier(4) carefully and it seems the correct place for this would
> be somewhere under `/usr/local/share':
>
> share/ architecture-independent files
>
> On the base systems, many macros (make templates and groff macros) are
> actually installed under /usr/share. However, the only library of shell
> functions I am aware of is `/etc/rc.subr', that landed on this funny
> location, probably to be pretty sure that this library is on the same
> filesystem as the scripts under /etc/rc.d.
>
> Several of the ports install shell scripts under `/usr/local/lib' that
> hier(4) devotes to ``shared and archive ar(1)-type libraries''. These
> shell scripts are:

The zsh port installs all its helper scripts and functions into
/usr/local/share/zsh , and the portupgrade and portmaster ports insert their
zsh autocompletion functions into /usr/local/share/zsh/site-functions.
Seems to work great. Ports that install scripts into /usr/local/lib
probably either don't have separate script and lib install paths in their
makefile (tcl probably), or their scripts aren't meant to be called directly
(firefox).

--
Dan Nelson
dne...@allantgroup.com

mikel king

unread,
Apr 5, 2011, 12:09:40 PM4/5/11
to

On Apr 5, 2011, at 11:23 AM, Michael Grünewald wrote:

> Dear FreeBSD users,
>
>

> today I come to you with what seems to be somehow pedantic question: where is the best place to install libraries of shell functions.
>
> I read hier(4) carefully and it seems the correct place for this would be somewhere under `/usr/local/share':
>
> share/ architecture-independent files
>
>
> On the base systems, many macros (make templates and groff macros) are actually installed under /usr/share. However, the only library of shell functions I am aware of is `/etc/rc.subr', that landed on this funny location, probably to be pretty sure that this library is on the same filesystem as the scripts under /etc/rc.d.
>
> Several of the ports install shell scripts under `/usr/local/lib' that hier(4) devotes to ``shared and archive ar(1)-type libraries''. These shell scripts are:
>

> > find /usr/local/lib -name '*.sh'
> /usr/local/lib/tk8.5/tkConfig.sh
> /usr/local/lib/seamonkey/run-mozilla.sh
> /usr/local/lib/libxul/run-mozilla.sh
> /usr/local/lib/rpm/convertrpmrc.sh
> /usr/local/lib/rpm/find-lang.sh
> /usr/local/lib/rpm/getpo.sh
> /usr/local/lib/rpm/u_pkg.sh
> /usr/local/lib/rpm/vpkg-provides.sh
> /usr/local/lib/rpm/vpkg-provides2.sh
> /usr/local/lib/firefox/run-mozilla.sh
> /usr/local/lib/tcl8.5/tclConfig.sh
> /usr/local/lib/thunderbird/run-mozilla.sh
> /usr/local/lib/llvm-gcc-2.8/gcc/x86_64-portbld-freebsd8.2/4.2.1/install-tools/fixinc.sh
>
> Two files (the `/usr/local/lib/tcl8.5/tclConfig.sh' one and the `s/tcl/tk/g' one) are actually shell script libraries (defining a bunch of variables), and all the others are ancillary scripts, that would maybe better fit in `/usr/local/libexec'.
>

> So, practical experience does not really second my a priori that these files sould go under the `share' hierarchy and I would like to have your opinion on this question.

> --
> Best Regards,
> Michael

For the bash library (http://jafdip.com/?p=537) we choose /usr/local/lib. This just seems to be the most logical place for this sort of thing.

Regards,
Mikel King
BSD News Network
http://bsdnews.net
skype: mikel.king
http://twitter.com/mikelking

Jerry

unread,
Apr 5, 2011, 1:32:40 PM4/5/11
to
On Tue, 5 Apr 2011 12:09:40 -0400
mikel king <mikel...@olivent.com> articulated:

> For the bash library (http://jafdip.com/?p=537) we
> choose /usr/local/lib. This just seems to be the most logical place
> for this sort of thing.

Interestingly enough, WOT gives that URL a poor rating.

http://www.mywot.com/en/scorecard/jafdip.com

--
Jerry ✌
FreeBS...@seibercom.net

Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
Please do not ignore the Reply-To header.
__________________________________________________________________

Chris Rees

unread,
Apr 5, 2011, 2:06:28 PM4/5/11
to
2011/4/5 Jerry McAllister <jer...@msu.edu>:

> On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 05:23:47PM +0200, Michael Grünewald wrote:
>
>> Dear FreeBSD users,
>>
>>
>> today I come to you with what seems to be somehow pedantic question:
>> where is the best place to install libraries of shell functions.
>>
>> I read hier(4) carefully and it seems the correct place for this would
>> be somewhere under `/usr/local/share':
>>
>>                 share/    architecture-independent files
>
> I would go with /usr/local/lib.
>

I'd rather agree with the OP; shell functions are arch-independent,
and are DATADIR suited IMO.

Chris

Michael Grünewald

unread,
Apr 7, 2011, 3:48:31 AM4/7/11
to
Chris Rees wrote:
> 2011/4/5 Jerry McAllister<jer...@msu.edu>:
>
>> I would go with /usr/local/lib

> I'd rather agree with the OP; shell functions are arch-independent,
> and are DATADIR suited IMO.
Thank all of you for your feedback!
Michael
0 new messages