Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian.

[Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>]

> I think all these shortened names derive from a time when computing
> resources were limited. If you're using an 80x25 terminal over at 50
> bits per second to a time-shared mainframe, it's more comfortable to
> type "/usr" than it is to type "/Programs". Easier to type "cp" than to
> type "copy", and so on. It's all fairly arbitrary. Why C:\? Why not
> System:\? Convention and history and inertia.

[ I think even back in the early days of time-sharing, connections were
  faster than 50bit/s.  ]

I suspect that the short names were chosen rather so as to minimize the
amount of typing that humans need to do on the command line.
And AFAIK humans haven't evolved enough during the last 50 years to
justify a redesign in this respect ;-)

Of course, the command line is less important nowadays, but using short
names is common practice in all walks of human life, so I really don't
think the reason is technological but rather a result of aesthetic
preference of those who developed the system.


        Stefan