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

[der.hans]

Am 06. Sep, 2006 schwätzte Dan Lund so:

> I run Gentoo, and my /bin/sh is symlinked to /bin/bash, which is an
> actual executable.

When bash is started as sh rather than as bash it's supposed to execute in
a compatability mode. That mode is to make bash behave like a true bourne
shell. I'm told the compatability is not 100%.

> Red Hat 7.3, 8.0, RHEL4.0 all are the same.  I just checked.
> The /bin directory should contain all of the binaries really
> "necessary" for the system to boot in at least single-user mode.
> Barring some stupid stuff like rpm libraries, everything is linked to
> /lib/* libraries so the /usr partition is completely desparate.

There's a lot of history behind /bin, /sbin, /usr, etc.

At this point we should probably just all try to work with what comes out
of the Linux Standards Base.

http://www.freestandards.org/en/LSB

I don't agree with everything the LSB does, but it's probably the best
thing we've got going.

Hmm, not sure why debian and Ubuntu aren't listed. As I recall debian did
really well in LSB testing.

ciao,

der.hans
-- 
#  https://www.LuftHans.com/        http://www.CiscoLearning.org/
#  Join the League of Professional System Administrators! https://LOPSA.org/
<moose> Roses are #FF0000,
<moose> Violets are #0000FF,
<moose> All my base,
<moose> Are belong to you.