From: davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen) Subject: Re: No /usr/local please (Would you please Shut Up?) Date: 24 Sep 1992 17:23:19 GMT
In article <HEIM.92Sep23153557@luzie.peanuts.informatik.uni-tuebingen.de>, heim@peanuts.informatik.uni-tuebingen.de (Gerald Heim) writes:
|
| hi netters
|
| My opinion is that we should keep /usr/local
I think that we should follow the lead of V.4 on the naming. The
reason for this is that it makes it *very* easy to backup, or move, or
update one part of a system without touching the rest. This is
important, because Linux is changing very fast and we wind up doing a
lot of upgrades.
/bin historical, not used
/usr/bin executables for stuff in the Linux distribution
(may be a mount)
/sbin standalone binaries, single user stuff
(must be in root)
/var/spool spool stuff, logs
/var/uucp uucp
/etc no executables!
/lib libraries from the distribution
/usr/local
/bin non-distribution binaries
/src if you keep your source here
/lib libs for /usr/local/bin programs
/etc config for stuff not in the distribution
By keeping the distribution and local binaries and configs separate
the system is much easier to administrate, and as Linux becomes more
mature this is important.
--
bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
Keyboard controller has been disabled, press F1 to continue.