$PATH missing '/usr/local/bin'

$PATH missing '/usr/local/bin' in /etc/login.defs and /etc/profile.
I only noticed, being somewhat a noob, after compiling the NEW Dillo 0.7.3 and finding that it places its' executable in /usr/local/bin (!). This, not being in my $PATH by default.
Please consider adding this line to future ARCH 0.6 or beyond for WORKSTATION users:
# /etc/profile
export PATH="/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin:/opt/bin"
Thanx.

Mt.Tam-Luxer wrote:I only noticed, being somewhat a noob, after compiling the NEW Dillo 0.7.3
A very wise decision to use this great browser :-) ... and I'm even serious about that.
Mt.Tam-Luxer wrote:and finding that it places its' executable in /usr/local/bin (!). This, not being in my $PATH by default.
For some reason it is in my /etc/profile ... but I don't remember if I put it there or not.
Firstly, (and as already mentioned more or less) I can see arguments why AL does not include /usr/local/bin by default (mainly because there is nothing there when only installing AL packages).
But OTOH, this is the beauty of AL : you can (and are even supposed to) configure your system as you like by editing the files in /etc. I guess that's why I don't remember, because the first thing I would do if need be is editing /etc/profile ;-) ...
Oh, but something (very general !) to consider : if you want to keep your system "Unix-style", don't put every posible PATH in /etc/profile, but put it in ~/.profile (or whatever shell you are using). If you are the only user, it does not really matter. But in a "true multi-user Unix system" you should not have /funky/path/bin in /etc/ ... not that /usr/local is exotic ....this is more of a general note.
sarah31 wrote:but imho if there is a PKGBUILD for a desired app (such as dillo)
yes, the PKGBUILD for dillo works fine, however, last week they released the latest version 0.7.3 which Mt.Tam-Luxer tried to install ( ... hint ... hint ... package maintainers ... :-) ... ). It was not quite clear from your post if yo wanted him to modify the PKGBUILD script or to just use it.
Oh, and besides changing pkgver, the source should now point to http://www.dillo.org/download/dillo-0.7.3.tar.bz2

Similar Messages

How do I add /usr/local/bin to path

Hi.
I have installed arch linux on a server.
It seems really very good - manged to install latest snort-inline easily...
However (and this is really a completely NOOB question)
- how do I add /usr/local/bin to the default (root) path ?
I have tried to add
PATH=/usr/local/bin
to /etc/enviornment
But it did not show up when using the - env command (after re-logging in)
I know that I could sym link to /usr/bin but i would like to know.
Any help would be good
Cheers
Last edited by yossarianuk (2008-10-02 10:31:21)

There's a place for all three of /usr/bin, /usr/local/bin, and ~/bin --- even on Arch.
If you download package whizbang-1.2.3 from some non-Arch site, its installer will often by default try to install its files into the /usr/local hierarchy. When making a PKGBUILD, you want to tell it instead to install into $pkgdir/usr, so that when you install the resulting pkg file with pacman, it goes into the /usr hierarchy. That's what the wiki page is saying: pacman-managed stuff goes into the /usr hierarchy.
/usr/local/* is for files you want to install systemwide without making a PKGBUILD. Your own scripts are a great example. Also you might want to install some compiled files that way, if making a PKGBUILD isn't worth it or you don't have the time to write (*and maintain!*) one.
~/bin is for scripts (could be compiled files too) that you want to only be available to that specific user.

Simple script in /usr/local/bin just won't start - SOLVED

I put this really simple script for starting psi into my /usr/local/bin, set it a+xr and added /usr/local/bin to my path. However, I just can't start the damn thing.
Here's the script itself (I really don't think there's something wrong with it, since if I type it in the shell it works fine):
#!/bin/zsh/
#start psi, never stop
while true;
do psi;
done
Here's my users $PATH:
─$ print $PATH
/bin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/usr/sbin:/usr/X11R6/bin:/opt/bin:/usr/local/bin:/opt/kde/bin:/opt/mozilla/bin:/opt/qt/bin
Here's the permissions of the script:
$ ls -lah /usr/local/bin
total 4.0K
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 80 Dec 15 03:52 ./
drwxr-xr-x 10 root root 240 Dec 10 18:55 ../
-rwxrwxr-x 1 kamagurka users 60 Dec 15 03:51 psi.start*
And here's what happens when I try to execute it:
$ psi.start
zsh: command not found: psi.start
So, I'm either missing something incredibly obvious, or something freaky's going on here. I hope it's the former.
EDIT: I had no idea where to put this, so I put it into Desktop Env since I'm trying to start a graphical app, but feel free to move it.
EDIT: Yea, I was being a little dense.

smoon wrote:Not sure if that's the problem, but try removing the trailing / (slash) from your script's shebang.
See, something really obvious. Stupid, even. You can see, I don't do a lot of scripting.

/usr/local/bin/pdf2ps: gs: not found

GS 8.54
Solaris 10
Oracle 11.5.10.2
I'm having problem regarding the pdf2ps which it seem cannot find the pdf2ps. When i try to print the pdf file in apps using pasta.
The printer confirm support pasta and post script.
The report submited is complete with warning. This is the error inside the log file.
/usr/local/bin/pdf2ps: gs: not found
Pasta: Error: Preprocess failed. Command=/usr/local/bin/pdf2ps /v99/app/applmgr/abghfuat/applcsf/out/ABGHFUAT_e2sscorhrmdba02/ABG_APXPBFOR_XML_BMO_2495102_1.PDF /v30/app/applmgr/abghfuat/comn/temp/pasta18270_0.tmp
Pasta: Error: Preprocess or Print command failed!!!
APP-FND-00500: AFPPRN received a return code of failure from routine FDUPRN. An error occurred while AOL tried to spawn the print process
Cause: AFPPRN received a return code of failure from the OSD routine FDUPRN. An error occurred while AOL tried to spawn the print process.
.pdf file being generated, but failing when calling Pasta.

Hi,
Since you indicate a version number for ghostscript in your post (8.54), I'm guessing the issue is that gs is not in the path for the applmgr user. On my system (Linux, not Solaris, so there may be differences), gs and pdf2ps are in different directories.
Try running the following command as the applmgr user:
which gsIf you don't get the path to gs as output from that command, you will need to add the path to gs to the path environment variable of the applmgr user.
Regards,
John P.

/usr/local/bin vs /usr/bin and Kazehakase vs Firefox

When you install an application to /usr/bin will it be more faster than installed on /usr/local/bin?
I have Firefox installed in /usr/bin and Kazehakase installed to /usr/local/bin. And it seems that Firefox is faster than Kazehakase. Why?
Last edited by Paingiver (2008-03-15 11:11:48)

dyscoria wrote:
Endperform wrote:The notion that an application can be sped up by linking it in your home directory, or even renaming it to one letter is also crazy. Your install will search for an executable in the path specified in $PATH and then execute the first instance it finds, but this does NOT speed the application itself up.
No seriously, if you rename all your executables to one letter then your system runs like lightning!
* am i really that bad at sarcasm? *
Yes, since there was no indication of sarcasm in your post. A or would have worked

How to change /usr/bin/grep To /usr/local/bin/grep

Hi
I have installed GNU Grep but when I am giving the command #which grep it is showing me solaris grep i.e /usr/bin/grep.
My question is how do I change it to /usr/local/bin/
Thanks in advance
Sukrut

You have a few options:
1) place /usr/local/bin before /usr/bin in your PATH environment variable
2) remove /usr/bin/grep altogether
3) move /usr/bin/grep to something else (ie: /usr/bin/solaris/grep) and symlink /usr/bin/grep to /usr/local/bin/grep just in case any hard coded programs/scripts rely on /usr/bin/grep being present.
I prefer step #3 since most of the various gnu utilities are virtually 100% drop-in replacements.

[RESOLVED] Can't detect symlink in /usr/local/bin

The directory is in the path:
echo $PATH
/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/sbin:/sbin:/usr/bin/core_perl
So I don't understand why I'm not able to run a symlink in /usr/local/bin.
Any ideas as to why?
Last edited by Goran (2012-10-17 23:24:12)

drcouzelis wrote:There's a good chance whatever it links to doesn't exist (bad link), isn't executable, or isn't accessable by your user.
Even dumber: "ln -s /usr/bin/myprogram\ -someoption linkname". I didn't realize that this is actually a link to a program named "myprogram -someoption".
... boy do I feel stupid.
Thanks for your help.

Question about /usr/local/bin in Mavericks ...

I just did a clean install of Mavericks on a 2010 MacPro. I understand Mavericks does not replicate this path (/usr/local/bin) when doing a clean install. Prior to this I was running 10.7.xx and I had a few compiled binaries installed in the bin folder. How do I address this? Can I simply recreate the path manually without risk?
Thanks.
-paul.

etresoft The 905
Re: Question about /usr/local/bin in Mavericks ...
Jan 15, 2014 9:30 AM (in response to Paul Figgiani)
So why would you expect /usr/local/bin to be there? If you install custom, low-level software like this on one system, it will not get migrated to the new system.
As I stated in my original post I did not expect it to be there. All I'm asking is how do I adreess the issue? Do I recreate it manually without any risk of screwing something up?

What about /usr/local/bin + sbin merge?

With the merge of /bin and /lib folders that just happened I was curious if there was a particular reason to keep both /usr/local/bin and /usr/local/sbin as actual folders in the filesystem, instead of making /usr/local/sbin a symlink to /usr/local/bin.

arojas wrote:If you delete it, it will be recreated with every update of the filesystem package anyway
This.
Jindur wrote:So I guess that folder is actually not under my complete control
The contents is*, pacman (actually, the filesystem package) just creates it for you since 99.9% of people either need it or don't care.
If it bothers you that much, you can use ABS to build your own "filesystem" package without any /usr/local/ paths
* Should be according to the Arch Packaging Standards unless someone writes a bad PKGBUILD which incidentally I found one of mine doing that yesterday... Accidents happen!
Last edited by fukawi2 (2013-06-04 23:07:23)

`make install` copies to /usr/local/bin

And /usr/local/bin is apparently not on the default arch $PATH.
This is odd becauase /usr/local/bin is the $bindir apparently for make by default.

echo 'export PATH="${PATH}:/usr/local/bin:/usr/local/sbin"' > /etc/profile.d/local-bin.sh && chmod a+x /etc/profile.d/local-bin.sh
But you really should use a PKGBUILD instead of make install so pacman can keep track of your packages in the system.

GTKlxsplit's makefile wiped my /usr/local/bin/

Alright, right now I'm feeling stupid and raped. but hey! At least I have a funny story to tell
One trusts, that someone that can make a gtk front-end for a terminal application can also make a simple makefile.
It doesn't seem to be the case.
I have some .001 .002... files and since with cat we need to find, then sort, then cat it, I decided to try lxsplit and it's simple gtk gui
Well, no configure file... that's ok since the application seems to be really simple.
make is only one line and returns ok. The binary file on the current folder seems to work, so let's make install it! No error, only one line, that's ok for me... let's try running it.
gtk<tab>... nothing. gtklx<tab>... still nothing.
Let's see where make install put it:
# make install
cp -f gtklxsplit /usr/local/bin
Ok maybe /usr/local/bin isn't in $PATH... wait a minute, /usr/local/bin?!!!!
Ok, just great, now I have a bin file on /usr/local instead of a bin folder!
Ok, make uninstall then edit Makefile: /usr/local/bin to /usr/bin/
Now make and make install.
gtklx<tab>... gtklxsplit! nice program runs fine... join... select file... "join" -> Segmentation fault!
Ok, useless... make uninstall.
some seconds later... wtf: yao<tab>... nothing!
ls /usr/bin
ls: cannot access /usr/bin: No such file or directory
Ok, just won the lottery!
I just have to find a way to commemorate! I still have firefox, pidgin, xterm and pcmanfm running until I close them It's gonna be a hell of a party!
Last edited by VuDu (2008-08-27 23:25:23)

Well ... it CAN be set to anywhere you like, but compliance with the Arch Packaging Standards would be preferable - or mandatory, if you want to submit your PKGBUILD to the AUR. A quick read of the AUR User Guidelines would also be useful in that case.
General hints -
./configure --help
will give you all the options for most apps. The ABS wiki pages provide the Arch-specific stuff.

Explanation of usr/local/bin

I have see this path come up when I have installed PHP/MySQL etc on my machine but neve rundersttod what it means.
Is this the directory where programmes are installed by me that are not part of the OS, like Photoshop, PHP, MySQL, MS word etc?
How do I look for files on my Finder are they stored on my HD or in my user profile?

Andy,
To add to Michael and j.v.'s posts, /usr/local has been the traditional place to install 3rd party software ie. software not written by the company that made the OS. So, /usr/local/bin contained binary files, /usr/local/lib contained the library files, /usr/local/man contained the man pages, and so forth. If you look on old Sun's, IBM, HP and other machines dating to the early 90's, that's generally what you'll see. Not all system administrators, or workstation owners, followed the general design intentions of the UNIX file system however.
Now, binaries, libraries and man pages can be in a wide variety of places, depending upon the package installer's design. Fink will like to default to /sw, for example.
As for freeware, or shareware, a well-designed config file will allow you to specify paths for bin, lib and man directories. So, with a little planning, you can get MySQL, and other open source freeware, to install in a directory layout of your design.
I've always thought of "usr" to mean "User", as in the end User, versus the OS system itself. So /bin and /sbin were for binaries that were primarily used/called by other system routines, while /usr/bin and /usr/local/bin would contain binaries that User's may call/use. Doesn't mean you can't use stuff in /bin, nor that system administration stuff can't be in /usr/bin. I think of it only as a general guide to understanding why something is in a particular directory, not a hard and fast rule.
Good general references on the overall design of UNIX are "The Design of the UNIX Operating System" by Maurice Bach, and "The Design and Implementation of the FreeBSD Operating System" by Marshall McKusick and George Neville-Neil.
Ed
PB G4 Mac OS X (10.2.x)

How to put g95 in usr/local/bin?

Hi all,
I am trying to compile a program called elmerice. When I type the "make compile" command, I get the following message:
elmerf90-nosh -c Solvers/AIFlowSolve_nlD2.f90 -o Solvers/AIFlowSolve_nlD2.o
/usr/local/bin/g95 -O5 -ffast-math -ftree-vectorize -march=nocona -fprefetch-loop-arrays -fomit-frame-pointer -fstrict-aliasing -momit-leaf-frame-pointer -falign-loops -I. -Ibinio -I/Applications/ElmerGUI.app/Contents//share/elmersolver/include -c Solvers/AIFlowSolve_nlD2.f90 -o Solvers/AIFlowSolve_nlD2.o
/Applications/ElmerGUI.app/Contents/bin/elmerf90-nosh: line 18: /usr/local/bin/g95: No such file or directory
I did install (I think successfully) g95 using macports, i.e. the command "sudo port install g95" but apparently it is not in /usr/local/bin, which seems to be where elmerice wants to find it.
One complicating factor might be that /usr/local/bin does have gfortran it.
It seems like elmerice will only use g95. Can I put g95 in the /usr/local/bin directory from wherever I have it now, and if so, how? Or can I just reinstall g95 in that directory?
Thanks,

Try creating a symbolic link from /usr/local/bin/g95 to wherever MacPorts put it. That is probably the easiest solution. Ideally, you would fix the makefile, but that wouldn't be easy.

Not able to see make in /usr/local/bin even after installing the package

Hi,
I have installed the package make-3.8 for solaris 9 on my machine with sun os 5.9. But still I can not see 'make' in /usr/local/bin .
Does anyone have an idea why?
I installed the same as root using the command:
pkdadd -d <packagename>
But it gives me quite many warnings like :
WARNING : /usr/local/bin/make <not present on Read only file system>
WARNING : /usr/local/bin/doc/make/ABOUT-NLS <not present on Read only file system>
At the end it says Installation of SMCmake was successful
Still I can't see make in /usr/local/bin.
Regards
Manmeet

Seems like /usr/local is mounted read-only? Run
mount | grep local
or
touch /usr/local/test
and see if you can write files in the directory.
/M.

/usr/local/bin

Hello everyone,
Whenever i am installing any s/w from source by compiling,its executable is getting stored in /usr/local/bin.Now im unable to use the s/w by just typing its executable name in the terminal,its giving me an error as "command not found".what i have to do is browse to the directory /usr/local/bin n then run the executable as ./xxxxx.How can i add the directory /usr/local/bin so that it too is checked for executables.
Thanks in advance,
Rajiv Nair.

Anyway, /usr/local is made just for those things you do not want to be touched by your package manager. So, if for any reason you do not want to write a PKGBUILD for something (if e.g., it is just a little script you wrote and you want to install it system-wide; or you have some reasons to make the compilation routine step by step), then /usr/local is then just the right place: /usr/local/bin and /usr/local/sbin for executable with various permissions, /usr/local/lib for the libraries, may be /usr/local/src for the sources, etc. Then you should just modify your /etc/profile (or your .bashrc, .zshrc).
This is not what is supported by arch, but it is something you can always do, if you like so, in any linux system of the world.

$PATH missing '/usr/local/bin'

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for