Install into /usr/local

[Richard Taubo]

Hi!

On 12. feb. 2007, at 21.27, Dan Shoop wrote:

> At 7:26 PM +0100 2/12/07, Richard Taubo wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> When installing some software OS X into /usr/local and reading the  
>> corresponding Linux manual, I see that OS X requires me to install  
>> using sudo whereas Linux do not.
>
> OS X requires no such thing.

No, but if you install anything inside the /usr or /usr/local folder,  
you would – per default – be asked for password as root is the only  
one with write access in these directories. Thus by default, without  
chowning the directory, the program installed will be owned by root.  
Right?

>
> Being root can be done numerous ways. I normally just log in as  
> root, but I'm older than sudo.
>
>> Is there a reason for this difference, and should the OS X way  
>> cause security concerns?
>
> Huh?

I was just referring to the difference I saw in install instructions  
for the Linux system, and what I had to do to make it work on OS X.
Due to this I was wondering if it is good security practice that  
anything installed in /usr/local – per default on OS X – will get  
owned by root, instead of by the person installing the software. In  
that way you could end up with a system where you run more programs  
as root than is actually needed.

Again, I was just wondering :-)


Richard Taubo