title: Is there a problem with having /usr/local/bin before /usr/bin on the path in OS X?
body: <p>By default, OS X 10.6 uses <code>/usr/libexec/path_helper</code> to add the following paths listed in the file <code>/etc/paths</code>:</p>
  
  <pre><code>/usr/bin
  /bin
  /usr/sbin
  /sbin
  /usr/local/bin
  </code></pre>
  
  <p>This means that <code>/usr/bin</code> comes before <code>/usr/local/bin</code> on the path. This results in the version of <a href="https://stackoverflow.com/q/5364340/95592">git installed by Xcode 4</a> in <code>/usr/bin</code> to be called instead of the version installed by Homebrew into <code>/usr/local/bin</code>.</p>
  
  <p>Which leads me to my question, is there a problem with having <code>/usr/local/bin</code> come before <code>/usr/bin</code> in the path? Is there a specific reason that Apple defaults to having <code>/usr/bin</code> come before <code>/usr/local/bin</code>?</p>
  
  <h2>How to change order of <code>/usr/bin</code> and <code>/usr/local/bin</code></h2>
  
  <p>Is it a problem to move <code>/usr/local/bin</code> from the bottom of the file <code>/etc/paths</code> to the top? Doing so would impact the path for more than just when I fire up Terminal, since <code>/usr/libexec/path_helper</code> could be used by other resources (I'm uncertain about this).</p>
  
  <p>While redundant, it seems safer for me to add <code>/usr/local/bin</code> to the path in <code>~/.bash_profile</code>, which would mean that <code>/usr/local/bin</code> would be on the path twice.</p>