From: arnold@skeeve.com (arnold@skeeve.com)
Subject: [TUHS] Understanding the /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin Split
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 01:26:39 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201202010926.q119QdMm007019@freefriends.org> (raw)
> http://www.osnews.com/story/25556/Understanding_the_bin_sbin_usr_bin_usr_sbin_Split
Cute, but most of the history is wrong.
The distinction between /bin and /usr/bin is true - / held the things
need to boot the system. Other things were on /usr.
The Berkeley guys did NOT invent shared libraries. Shared libraries as
we know them came originally from Sun, on SunOS 4.x for sure, possibly
on SunOS 3.x. (Larry?) Many commercial vendors adopted the design (Ultrix,
I think, and maybe others) and finally around 4.4 they found their way into
"pure" BSD.
/home and /opt came into the picture circa 1989 with SVR4 when Berkeley,
AT&T and Sun (and maybe a few others?) got together to standardize the
layout and make diskless booting possbile and reasonable with NFS sharing
of home directories. /sbin & /usr/sbin came into the picture at this
point also, to hold executables that until then had lived in /etc. The
idea was that /etc should only have per-machine configuration files.
The general point of the article and of some of the postings, that the
proliferation doesn't make a lot of sense today, is well taken. The
Bell Labs guys themselves recognized this when they did Plan 9.
The problem is even worse on 64 bit Linux systems, which can handle
two different architectures. /lib and /lib64 confuse a lot of the
older 'configure' programs.
Personally, I hate reading articles by "experts" where 85% of the facts
are wrong. I lived through all of it, and I know better... :-)
Arnold
next reply other threads:[~2012-02-01 9:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-01 9:26 arnold [this message]
2012-02-02 13:35 ` Tim Bradshaw
2012-02-02 13:49 ` Larry McVoy
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-02-05 8:38 Hendrik Jan Thomassen
2012-02-05 10:13 ` Jaap Akkerhuis
2012-02-05 17:15 ` Warner Losh
2012-02-04 19:34 Pepe
2012-02-04 21:05 ` Lyndon Nerenberg
2012-02-02 23:16 Norman Wilson
2012-02-02 23:37 ` Carl Lowenstein
2012-02-02 23:58 ` John Cowan
2012-01-31 19:16 A. P. Garcia
2012-01-31 19:27 ` Warner Losh
2012-02-01 11:12 ` Jose R. Valverde
2012-02-01 17:35 ` Warner Losh
2012-02-02 13:32 ` Random832
2012-02-02 17:24 ` Warner Losh
2012-02-02 17:36 ` John Cowan
2012-02-02 18:10 ` Warner Losh
2012-02-02 21:14 ` Dave Horsfall
2012-02-02 21:49 ` Warner Losh
2012-02-02 22:29 ` Tim Newsham
2012-02-02 22:47 ` Warner Losh
2012-02-02 22:59 ` Lyndon Nerenberg
2012-02-02 23:33 ` Warner Losh
2012-02-02 22:53 ` Lyndon Nerenberg
2012-02-02 23:35 ` Warner Losh
2012-02-03 11:10 ` Tim Bradshaw
2012-02-03 15:22 ` Jose R. Valverde
2012-02-03 16:06 ` Ronald Natalie
2012-02-03 16:09 ` Steve Nickolas
2012-02-02 17:40 ` Warner Losh
2012-02-02 18:02 ` Tim Newsham
2012-02-02 13:45 ` Tim Bradshaw
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201202010926.q119QdMm007019@freefriends.org \
--to=arnold@skeeve.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).