/usr/local/bin vs /usr/local/sbin

[George Toft]

Darrin Chandler wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 03, 2006 at 01:03:36PM -0700, Kurt Granroth wrote:
> 
>>Jay wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, Eric "Shubes" wrote:
>>>
>>>>What's the 's' supposed to stand for? System (as in OS)?
>>>>Where should application scripts go by convention? Somewhere
>>>>referenced by $PATH I'm imagining. /usr/local/bin?
>>>
>>>Um, good guesses on the 'security' and 'system' fronts, but
>>>traditionally (think old UNIX conventions here), the 's' in sbin stands
>>>for 'static'. It is intended as the place for static-compiled binaries
>>>(as opposed to dynamic-compiled binaries). Static binaries would also be
>>>best for functions like booting and system recovery, since during those
>>>tasks libraries and linkers may not be available/functioning.
>>
>>Traditionally, yes, but that has to be an outdated convention by now.  A
>>quick look at the binaries in /sbin on a typical Linux system shows that
>>very very few are static anymore.
>>
>>I tend to think off it like so:
>>
>>/sbin -> Utilities dealing with low level systems like file systems,
>>networks, modules, etc.  All typically run only for root.
>>
>>/usr/sbin -> System daemons like cupsd, mysqld, imapd, smbd, and so and
>>so forth.  Also contains other root-only utilities that aren't as low level.
> 
> 
> Traditionally, and still in spirit. Nothing in /bin and /sbin should
> depend on /usr being mounted. If it does, then it's broken, IMHO.
> 

Solaris is broken (by this definition).  Solaris will not boot if /usr 
is unavailable.  A certain bank here in town found that out the hard 
way.  The I found it out also when I decided to move the /usr partition. 
Yup, box no boot with no /usr.  Solaris 8, btw.

George Toft, CISSP, MSIS
My IT Department
www.myITaz.com
480-544-1067

Confidential data protection experts for the financial industry.