| 1 |
On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 13:17:01 +0000 |
| 2 |
Neil Bothwick <neil@××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 09:00:37 +0100, Andrea Conti wrote: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> > Personally I stopped bothering with a separate /usr ages ago, so I |
| 7 |
> > don't really care. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Having given this some thought recently, I am coming round to the view |
| 10 |
> that the problem is /usr itself. It may have had a place when boot |
| 11 |
> disks were limited in size, but I really don't see the point it in at |
| 12 |
> all nowadays. This whole question of which bin directory does code |
| 13 |
> belong in should be "why do we need so many bin directories"? |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
There are some separations that do make sense in a Unix context: |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
- */bin vs */sbin is one. Nothing to do with security, but */sbin can |
| 20 |
go in root's PATH and apps that only makes sense when run as root (eg |
| 21 |
mkfs) go there. This avoids cluttering the display with useful crap |
| 22 |
from tab-completion. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
- / vs /usr/local. I like this one, everything I build and install |
| 25 |
myself without help from the package manager goes here. On FreeBSD it |
| 26 |
means I used ports to install the stuff and it's not in world. I do |
| 27 |
need this distinction in my world. Perl CPAN too for the same reasons. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
- /opt. Um yeah, OK. So we have these things called proprietary apps |
| 30 |
where devs just want to make a directory specially for their app and |
| 31 |
dump everything belong it. OK, as a scheme, it works. I don't like |
| 32 |
it but I don't have a better idea. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
/ vs /usr is the only one I don't need myself, as /usr is not read-only |
| 35 |
(a very valid use case) and I don't have thin clients on the network. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
Alan McKinnnon |
| 39 |
alan.mckinnon@×××××.com |
Archives