| 1 |
On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 2:52 PM, Kai Krakow <hurikhan77@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Am Sat, 10 Feb 2018 19:38:56 +0000 schrieb Wols Lists: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> On 10/02/18 18:56, Kai Krakow wrote: |
| 5 |
>>> role and /usr takes the role of /, and /home already took the role of |
| 6 |
>>> /usr (that's why it's called /usr, it was user data in early unix). The |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> Actually no, not at all. /usr is not short for USeR, it's an acronym for |
| 9 |
>> User System Resources, which is why it contains OS stuff, not user |
| 10 |
>> stuff. Very confusing, I know. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> From https://www.tldp.org/LDP/Linux-Filesystem-Hierarchy/html/usr.html: |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
>> In the original Unix implementations, /usr was where the home |
| 15 |
>> directories of the users were placed (that is to say, /usr/someone was |
| 16 |
>> then the directory now known as /home/someone). In current Unices, /usr |
| 17 |
>> is where user-land programs and data (as opposed to 'system land' |
| 18 |
>> programs and data) are. The name hasn't changed, but it's meaning has |
| 19 |
>> narrowed and lengthened from "everything user related" to "user usable |
| 20 |
>> programs and data". As such, some people may now refer to this |
| 21 |
>> directory as meaning 'User System Resources' and not 'user' as was |
| 22 |
>> originally intended. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> So, actually the acronym was only invented later to represent the new |
| 25 |
> role of the directory. ;-) |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
A bit more of history here: |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
http://www.osnews.com/story/25556/Understanding_the_bin_sbin_usr_bin_usr_sbin_Split |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
Rich |
Archives