/usr/local/bin in $PATH in system scripts?

[Derek Broughton]

Fergal Daly wrote:

> On 16/04/07, Derek Broughton <news at pointerstop.ca> wrote:
>> Fergal Daly wrote:
>>
>> No, because none of the Ubuntu packages should rely on anything
>> in /usr/local - that's for _your_ use.  I don't put much in /usr/local,
>> but it's certainly not redundant (right now, for sure, I have maven -
>> which isn't in Ubuntu).
> 
> I'm not saying /usr/local/ is redundant I'm saying putting in $PATH in
> a system script redundant because everything should be found in
> /usr/bin (or /bin or whatever).

Well, it's never redundant to put a path statement into a system script -
that's how you apply the policy to ensure that the script is independent of
files in /usr/local.
>>
>> And if they have their own paths, they should work - presumably they know
>> what they're doing.
> 
> Except some of them don't work, that's why I'm raising this issue.

Exactly - so those would be bugs and should be reported as such.  Having
something as "policy" implies that it's a target that should be strived
for, not a guarantee.  
> 
>> File a bug in launchpad.
> 
> I did (the link is in quoted text above), the developer disagrees with
> me (and you it seems). I came here looking for backup to my argument.
> I'll try devel-discuss,

Ah, well, there's not a lot to be done when the developer disagrees - I have
a few outstanding bugs like that (well, probably none of them are actually
outstanding, because they tend to get marked as "resolved") :-)  I _do_
agree with you, fwiw.
-- 
derek