4 ms·

It may just have been once packages were installed. I started using Unix ten-ish years ago with RedHat, and even as a beginner I saw that using RPMs quickly bec

It may just have been once packages were installed. I started using Unix ten-ish years ago with RedHat, and even as a beginner I saw that using RPMs quickly became a mess of inconsistent paths and circular dependencies. It was sloppy. Not even "bleeding-edge testing release" sloppy, just sloppy. The situation has probably improved, but I moved on to Debian, then OpenBSD. I'm still happy with OpenBSD, but my next choice would probably be FreeBSD, Debian, or Arch (in that order).

nailer 16y ago
> It may just have been once packages were installed. The whole OS is packages. The first thing that goes on a new system during the OS installer (anaconda, again more than 10 years old) is the glibc package. 10 years ago I assure you no package of the thousands included in Red Hat Linux put something in /usr/local.
- silentbicycle 16y ago
  Well, ok, it may have just put them in /etc, /usr/opt, /etc/local, and /moustache. It wasn't that it did or didn't put things in /usr/local, but that there wasn't a consistently followed layout like OpenBSD's (http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=hier http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=hier). Also, like I said - it's probably gotten better since ten years ago. It was really annoying, though, and I'm not misremembering things: I specifically switched from RedHat to Debian because I was sick of it. It wasn't consistent with itself, let alone any standard.
  - ciupicri 16y ago
    Linux had and still has the Linux Filesystem Hierarchy (http://tldp.org/LDP/Linux-Filesystem-Hierarchy/html/index.html http://tldp.org/LDP/Linux-Filesystem-Hierarchy/html/index.ht...). It's true that it hasn't been 100% stable, but things do evolve and it's quite logical.
    - deleted 16y ago
      [deleted]
  - nailer 16y ago
    Linux has had the FHS since the late 90s. * Config files go in /etc. * Spools, caches an so on go in /var * Binaries for all users go in /bin if they're important, /usr/bin if they're less so * Binaries for root go in /sbin if they're important, /usr/sbin if they're less so The standard was mature a decade ago and long before then. I suspect you just may have not been used to the standard.
    - silentbicycle 16y ago
      I get that Linux uses a different standard layout than BSD. I really do. The thing is that when I was using RedHat, years and years ago, its paths were not internally consistently. I'm talking about that specific distro, at that specific time. Debian was much better in that regard, and I didn't look back.
      - nailer 16y ago
        OK. I (and it seems the other poster) knows from our own experience that Red Hat's stuck closely to the FHS for years. There's only one folder - /etc/rc.d/init.d - consistent in Red Hat but symlinked to the correct /etc/init.d location used by other distros - that's been a significant difference in the last decade.

nailer 16y ago

> It may just have been once packages were installed. The whole OS is packages. The first thing that goes on a new system during the OS installer (anaconda, again more than 10 years old) is the glibc package. 10 years ago I assure you no package of the thousands included in Red Hat Linux put something in /usr/local.

silentbicycle 16y ago
Well, ok, it may have just put them in /etc, /usr/opt, /etc/local, and /moustache. It wasn't that it did or didn't put things in /usr/local, but that there wasn't a consistently followed layout like OpenBSD's (http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=hier http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=hier). Also, like I said - it's probably gotten better since ten years ago. It was really annoying, though, and I'm not misremembering things: I specifically switched from RedHat to Debian because I was sick of it. It wasn't consistent with itself, let alone any standard.
- ciupicri 16y ago
  Linux had and still has the Linux Filesystem Hierarchy (http://tldp.org/LDP/Linux-Filesystem-Hierarchy/html/index.html http://tldp.org/LDP/Linux-Filesystem-Hierarchy/html/index.ht...). It's true that it hasn't been 100% stable, but things do evolve and it's quite logical.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
- nailer 16y ago
  Linux has had the FHS since the late 90s. * Config files go in /etc. * Spools, caches an so on go in /var * Binaries for all users go in /bin if they're important, /usr/bin if they're less so * Binaries for root go in /sbin if they're important, /usr/sbin if they're less so The standard was mature a decade ago and long before then. I suspect you just may have not been used to the standard.
  - silentbicycle 16y ago
    I get that Linux uses a different standard layout than BSD. I really do. The thing is that when I was using RedHat, years and years ago, its paths were not internally consistently. I'm talking about that specific distro, at that specific time. Debian was much better in that regard, and I didn't look back.
    - nailer 16y ago
      OK. I (and it seems the other poster) knows from our own experience that Red Hat's stuck closely to the FHS for years. There's only one folder - /etc/rc.d/init.d - consistent in Red Hat but symlinked to the correct /etc/init.d location used by other distros - that's been a significant difference in the last decade.