YA /[s]bin thread was Re: Who is a Debian user?

[John Galt <galt@inconnu.isu.edu>]

Okay, the "traceroute in /bin" argument has died any number of times, but
since the last iteration, I found out at least one anomaly that really
needs to be dealt with.  pidof: /bin/pidof is a symlink to
../sbin/killall6.  I can barely understand the need for a differentation
between /bin and /sbin: if the only way something can be defied is via an
arbitrary rule, perhaps the need for it needs to be rethought, but I
just can't fit see the point of view that allows for something to be in
both /bin and /sbin at the same time.  All of the [s]bin arguments hinge
on there being a bright line betwixt bin and sbin, and the other side is
obviously on the wrong one.  I've actually been waiting for this iteration
of the [s]bin argument so I can ask both sides if this should be a bug or
just a localized complaint.

As far as where traceroute is: AFAICT, traceroute was originally placed in
/sbin by computer scientists working for the NSDAP :)

On Sun, 26 Aug 2001, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
--------8<---------
>This has been brought up over and over and over and over and over
>again. People are tired of it, that's all. The reason that traceroute is
>in /usr/sbin is simple: FHS defines that "user tools" belong in /usr/bin,
>while "administrator tools" belong in /usr/sbin. However, FHS does *not*
>clearly define what "administrator tools" are, and _that_ is the
>problem. In this case, the maintainer of traceroute feels that traceroute
>is a administrator tool, so it goes in /usr/sbin.
>
>

-- 
All I know is what the words know, and dead things, and that
makes a handsome little sum, with a beginning and a middle and
an end, as in the well-built phrase and the long sonata of the dead.
		-- Samuel Beckett

John Galt (galt@inconnu.isu.edu)