4 ms·
Meanwhile, your $HOME's dotfiles want a word about cleanliness... And your /usr/bin wants to argue with /usr/local/bin and both of those cringe when they see /
by inetknght 4y ago
Meanwhile, your $HOME's dotfiles want a word about cleanliness...
And your /usr/bin wants to argue with /usr/local/bin and both of those cringe when they see /bin.
No, mentioning and sticking to standards is a good thing and I think is very on-topic.
- Joker_vD 4y agoThe good thing about standards is that there are so many of them to chose from. Besides, if a man wants to have /storage on his owned machine, who are we to tell him otherwise?
- inetknght 4y ago> if a man wants to have /storage on his owned machine, who are we to tell him otherwise? Nothing wrong with a man putting /storage on his owned machine. But if I were using my own machine and I put /storage there (actually, I used /opt/<site>), it would be because I didn't know there was a standard place for things. Then someone told me about /srv and its purpose. So now I use /srv even on my own machine so that I'm familiar with /srv in a professional environment.
- HeyLaughingBoy 4y agoYup, and while I'm not likely to ever again build a Linux fileserver, TIL.
- dekhn 4y agoI'm all for filesystem standards but "serving" is such an ephemeral concept that I don't think it makes sense to mandate that "files" that are "served" must be mounted under /srv. That's just being excessively pedantic.