3 ms·

> The separate paths were originally done for reasons These reasons were not originally philosophical in nature: http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/201

by setopt 2y ago

> The separate paths were originally done for reasons These reasons were not originally philosophical in nature: http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2010-December/074114.html http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2010-December/074... IMO, keeping /usr/bin and /usr/local/bin separate from /bin doesn’t serve any useful purpose except historical continuity. You can’t really get rid of those paths without breaking things (e.g. since /usr/bin/env is usually hardcoded in shebangs), but symlinking them together is a practical way of effectively merging them.

forgotpwd16 2y ago
> > The separate paths were originally done for reasons > > These reasons were not originally philosophical in nature: http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2010-December/074114.html http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2010-December/074... > > IMO, keeping /usr/bin and /usr/local/bin separate from /bin doesn’t serve any useful purpose except historical continuity. You can’t really get rid of those paths without breaking things (e.g. since /usr/bin/env is usually hardcoded in shebangs), but symlinking them together is a practical way of effectively merging them. The `local` does. It is were
- forgotpwd16 2y ago
  Urgh, that's what get trying to write a comment through an app (and sadly edit time window is gone). Anyway, the `local` does. It is a manually managed sub-hierarchy, compared to rest being system managed. So `/bin` and `/usr/bin` will have executables managed through a package manager whereas `/local/bin` is were admin will put executables by themselves to be accessible by all users. Also, it's were `make install` will put its builds by default. Systemd provides a per-user similar hierarchy in `~/.local`, which has a `~/.local/bin` directory.
DaSHacka 2y ago
`/usr/local/bin` is where manually installed packages go, and I've never seen it merged to `/bin` or `/usr/bin` on any *NIX system I've ever used. I use it all the time for custom scripts/programs I don't want the package manager to interfere with. https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/4186/what-is-usr-local-bin#4187 https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/4186/what-is-usr-lo...
- setopt 2y ago
  I am aware of its usage, but switched to installing things into separate folders in /opt many years ago. That way, it’s easy to uninstall stuff (rm the right subfolder), and you can install apps that don’t follow the Unix conventions into the same place (e.g. Matlab). You’re right though, I haven’t seen any mainstream distributions (i.e. no GoboLinux) that removes /usr/local.

by setopt 2y ago

forgotpwd16 2y ago

> > The separate paths were originally done for reasons > > These reasons were not originally philosophical in nature: http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2010-December/074114.html http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2010-December/074... > > IMO, keeping /usr/bin and /usr/local/bin separate from /bin doesn’t serve any useful purpose except historical continuity. You can’t really get rid of those paths without breaking things (e.g. since /usr/bin/env is usually hardcoded in shebangs), but symlinking them together is a practical way of effectively merging them. The `local` does. It is were

forgotpwd16 2y ago
Urgh, that's what get trying to write a comment through an app (and sadly edit time window is gone). Anyway, the `local` does. It is a manually managed sub-hierarchy, compared to rest being system managed. So `/bin` and `/usr/bin` will have executables managed through a package manager whereas `/local/bin` is were admin will put executables by themselves to be accessible by all users. Also, it's were `make install` will put its builds by default. Systemd provides a per-user similar hierarchy in `~/.local`, which has a `~/.local/bin` directory.

DaSHacka 2y ago

`/usr/local/bin` is where manually installed packages go, and I've never seen it merged to `/bin` or `/usr/bin` on any *NIX system I've ever used. I use it all the time for custom scripts/programs I don't want the package manager to interfere with. https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/4186/what-is-usr-local-bin#4187 https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/4186/what-is-usr-lo...

setopt 2y ago
I am aware of its usage, but switched to installing things into separate folders in /opt many years ago. That way, it’s easy to uninstall stuff (rm the right subfolder), and you can install apps that don’t follow the Unix conventions into the same place (e.g. Matlab). You’re right though, I haven’t seen any mainstream distributions (i.e. no GoboLinux) that removes /usr/local.