PATH conventions for Solaris

PATH conventions for Solaris

Post by Gary Mil » Fri, 21 Apr 1995 04:00:00



How do people set up the PATH under Solaris?  I'm planning to convert a
bunch of workstations from 4.1.3 to Solaris 2.4, so I need separate
directories for locally-installed Solaris binaries and 4.1.3 binaries,
as well as the standard Solaris binaries.  What do people call these
directories?

I've identified /usr/bin, /usr/ucb, /usr/ccs/bin, and /usr/openwin/bin
as the standard directories for ordinary users, with the addition of
/usr/sbin for us administrators.  What's a good order for these?

--
-Gary Mills-          -Unix Support-           -U of M Computer Services-

 
 
 

PATH conventions for Solaris

Post by Swa Frantz » Sat, 22 Apr 1995 04:00:00


|> How do people set up the PATH under Solaris?  I'm planning to convert a
|> bunch of workstations from 4.1.3 to Solaris 2.4, so I need separate
|> directories for locally-installed Solaris binaries and 4.1.3 binaries,
|> as well as the standard Solaris binaries.  What do people call these
|> directories?

You can call then whatever you want (/usr/local ,  /opt/local , ...)

|> I've identified /usr/bin, /usr/ucb, /usr/ccs/bin, and /usr/openwin/bin
|> as the standard directories for ordinary users, with the addition of
|> /usr/sbin for us administrators.  What's a good order for these?

Put /usr/ucb last ! (if you use it at all) , it's a collection of
bug and (mis)features.

SWA
--
Swa Frantzen
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven    Tel: +32 16 327700 (department)
Department of Computer Science         +32 16 327604 (direct, prefered)
Celestijnenlaan 200 A             Fax: +32 16 327996
B-3001 Heverlee (Leuven)


 
 
 

PATH conventions for Solaris

Post by Andre Be » Mon, 24 Apr 1995 04:00:00


|> How do people set up the PATH under Solaris?  I'm planning to convert a
|> bunch of workstations from 4.1.3 to Solaris 2.4, so I need separate
|> directories for locally-installed Solaris binaries and 4.1.3 binaries,
|> as well as the standard Solaris binaries.  What do people call these
|> directories?

|> I've identified /usr/bin, /usr/ucb, /usr/ccs/bin, and /usr/openwin/bin
|> as the standard directories for ordinary users, with the addition of
|> /usr/sbin for us administrators.  What's a good order for these?

1) Decide whether you want more SysV-ish or more BSD-ish behavior, and
   put /usr/ucb depending on this. I prefer to have ucb late in the path.

2) If you have installed some packages, it is a good idea to put something
   like /opt/*/bin into the path, however it looks somewhat dangerous.

3) Don't forget /usr/local/bin ;)

--
+-o-+--------------------------------------------------------+-o-+
| o |               \\\- Brain Inside -///                   | o |
| o |                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^                       | o |

+-o-+--------------------------------------------------------+-o-+

 
 
 

PATH conventions for Solaris

Post by R. Stewart Ell » Wed, 26 Apr 1995 04:00:00



 >|> How do people set up the PATH under Solaris?  I'm planning to convert a
 >|> bunch of workstations from 4.1.3 to Solaris 2.4, so I need separate
 >|> directories for locally-installed Solaris binaries and 4.1.3 binaries,
 >|> as well as the standard Solaris binaries.  What do people call these
 >|> directories?

 >You can call then whatever you want (/usr/local ,  /opt/local , ...)

 >|> I've identified /usr/bin, /usr/ucb, /usr/ccs/bin, and /usr/openwin/bin
 >|> as the standard directories for ordinary users, with the addition of
 >|> /usr/sbin for us administrators.  What's a good order for these?

 >Put /usr/ucb last ! (if you use it at all) , it's a collection of
 >bug and (mis)features.

Amen!  The only two programs I used to want from /usr/ucb were ps and df.
Then I discovered that /usr/bin/df -tk gives the good old BSD output.  Now I
leave /usr/ucb off the path and when I want bsd ps I type '/usr/ucb/ps'.

 >SWA
 >--
 >Swa Frantzen
 >Katholieke Universiteit Leuven    Tel: +32 16 327700 (department)
 >Department of Computer Science         +32 16 327604 (direct, prefered)
 >Celestijnenlaan 200 A             Fax: +32 16 327996
 >B-3001 Heverlee (Leuven)

--
  R.Stewart(Stew) Ellis, Assoc.Prof., (Off)810-762-9765   ___________________
  Humanities & Social Science,  GMI Eng.& Mgmt. Inst.    /   _____  ______

  Gopher,chimera,nn,tin,jove,modems, free code is best!/________/ /  /  / /

 
 
 

PATH conventions for Solaris

Post by Ruth Miln » Fri, 28 Apr 1995 04:00:00



Quote:

>Amen!  The only two programs I used to want from /usr/ucb were ps and df.

If people are used to the BSD-style printing commands (lpr, lpq etc.)
then having /usr/ucb in the path will be useful. It hardly seems worth
teaching everyone the SysV commands if they will wind up being changed
in 2.5 (as was discussed some time ago per Sun's statements of forth-
coming printing subsystem changes).

It should definitely be last, though, so that only BSD-unique commands
are picked up by default, not the ones that conflict with SV versions.
--
Ruth Milner                            NRAO                  Socorro NM

 
 
 

PATH conventions for Solaris

Post by Casper H.S. D » Mon, 01 May 1995 04:00:00



>If people are used to the BSD-style printing commands (lpr, lpq etc.)
>then having /usr/ucb in the path will be useful. It hardly seems worth
>teaching everyone the SysV commands if they will wind up being changed
>in 2.5 (as was discussed some time ago per Sun's statements of forth-
>coming printing subsystem changes).

Hm, the user commadns of both SV and BSD will linger on.  Since
BSD-style lprm doesn'teven work with the latest of Sun's patches
(at least when using the "bsd" protocol), the SV commands seem the
way to go.

Quote:>It should definitely be last, though, so that only BSD-unique commands
>are picked up by default, not the ones that conflict with SV versions.

How true.  At the FWI, I modified /usr/ucb/{cc,lint,ld} to print a stern
warning message if they're first in your PATH.

Casper
--
Casper Dik - Network Security Engineer - Sun Microsystems
This article is posted from my guest account at the University

 
 
 

1. Convention for PATHs? (Where does program-A belong?)

Could somebody clarify the usage of conventional paths?
I used to put adm application in /etc, network things in /usr/etc, and
others scattered in /bin, /usr/bin, /usr/local/bin, etc.
However, as my Linux systems grow bigger, they become mess and I need some
logical ways to arrange my applications.
Thanks in advance for any input.

Jay
--

Hipress/Spectra/Sherlock/Pils Linux System Manager. (206) 543-7543
Physics, U. of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195

2. Adaptec 2842vl & Exabyte 8505 problem

3. Windows Path Convention

4. Novell IPX Implementation

5. Syntax convention for PHP3, relative paths

6. cannot enter X-win after upgrade kernel

7. add in the PATH a path if not present in the PATH

8. Console Cable's Part #

9. ksh: add path to $PATH only when ot yet in $PATH

10. zsh's 'typeset -U path' wipes out path/PATH

11. PATH=$(getconf PATH), but PATH for getconf?

12. set path = "$path" hoses path in tcsh -- why???

13. How to expand paths in $PATH like "~/bin" to full path?