Re: paths (/usr/this, /usr/that)
w trillich wrote:
>my 2.1 cd installed a great deal of stuff under /usr/doc,
>and the new potato (i.e. 'apt-get upgrade', with
>/etc/apt/sources.list pointing to 'frozen') puts bunches
>of stuff in /usr/share/doc.
>
>what's the functional or intellectual distinction:
> /lib
> /usr/lib
> /usr/local/lib
> /var/lib
>
> /usr/doc
> /usr/share/doc
>
> /bin
> /usr/bin
> /usr/local/bin
> /sbin
> /usr/sbin
> /usr/local/sbin
>
Anything directly under root (/bin /lib /etc /sbin /dev) is needed for the
system to boot. These directories should always be on the root partition.
Things under /usr (and /var) may well be on separate partitions; if the
machine is booted single-user, anything on these won't be available. So
things that are useful in normal use, but can be foregone when doing basic
maintenance, go in /usr/bin or /usr/sbin.
/usr/local is purely for the local administrator; Debian packages should
never do anything here (except perhaps to create a directory).
/usr/doc, /usr/info and /usr/man are the old places for storing documentation.
This is being superseded by /usr/share/..., though in potato there should be
symlinks to /usr/doc/... to keep things looking the same.
The distinction between bin and sbin is that sbin contains programs that
should only be needed by the system administrator. These directories
should not be in the path for normal users.
There is document called the FHS, which describes a file system hierarchy
for Unix, which Debina is aiming to conform to. This explains in much
more detail the rationale for these divisions, and others that have not been
mentioned. There is a link to it somewhere in www.debian.org.
--
Oliver Elphick Oliver.Elphick@lfix.co.uk
Isle of Wight http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
PGP key from public servers; key ID 32B8FAA1
========================================
"I sought the LORD, and he heard me, and delivered me
from all my fears." Psalms 34:41
Reply to: