OK to create /usr/local/bin?

I think you may be having permissions problems with your installation script. You may need to run it under sudo in order to install into /usr/local.

Whatever you do, do NOT create your own /usr/local unless you know what you are doing.

You might have to invoke the installer script with

<pre>
sudo nameofscript
</pre>
so it will be able to install stuff into /usr/local.

/usr/local is empty on a new machine, so although caution is warranted, it is a relatively safe place to learn, because if anything should go wrong, you can just delete the whole directory without harm.

I'm not sure creating /usr/local would cause all that much trouble. Maybe you could cause some problems if it's not owned by root:wheel with 755?

So there you go: if the advice to run the installer with sudo doesn't fix the problem, maybe you can just run these three commands before running the installer:

sudo mkdir /usr/local <this creates the directory>
sudo chown root:wheel <this gives it the correct owner and group>
sudo chmod 755 /usr/local <and this gives it the right permissions>

Any objections to that advice?

It's not an objection, but there is some merit to having the user create and own everything in /usr/local and then (s)he doesn't have to use sudo to do anything, so a wayward installer or makefile would then be prevented from damaging the system.

Ah -- so to carry this thread along a complete tangent...

Does it matter who owns the directory and executables? Sounds like you're suggesting there's an advantage to having everything owned by a plain old user?

My /usr/local/bin is root:wheel owned -- presumably whichever installer created the directory did it that way without my intervention (or maybe it was because I ran a "sudo make install").

If you are the only or primary user of your computer, and you want to mess around, /usr/local is as good a place as any, since most software installs in it by default. Another option is to do stuff in your home directory.

If you have a dumb installer or Makefile that tries to install and possibly over-write files in say /usr/bin, you would be tipped off by install permission failure, whereas if you issued "sudo make install" you are at the mercy of whomever wrote the Makefile.

I actually build stuff in my home directory and install it into root-owned /usr/local, and the first time I issue "make -i install" I do it without write permissions and I can watch where it tries to put stuff. That is excessively paranoid. But its when you stop being paranoid.

Anyway, it doesn't much matter. For security reasons on a multiuser system, it is best to have multi-user accessed executables in root-owned directories.

Hi Ingo and gang,
I just wanted to put in a strong vote for having every directory in your path owned by root. Anything else invites trojan attacks. 755 is the correct permissions since you don't want to restrict the use of utilities, just the ability to write to the directories containing them. Since those permissions are the default, the following command should suffice:

sudo mkdir -p /usr/local/bin

--
Gary
~~~~
When license fees are too high,
users do things by hand.
When the management is too intrusive,
users lose their spirit.

Hack for the user's benefit.
Trust them; leave them alone.

Ingo, that script doesn't create the directory. You need to create it yourself following the instructions I gave you earlier.