Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian.
On 2021-03-10 17:13 -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> 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.
The Unix-Haters Handbook has the following theory:
,----
| Those of us who used early 70s I/O devices suspect the degeneracy stems
| from the speed, reliability, and, most importantly, the keyboard of the
| ASR-33 Teletype, the common input/output device in those days. Unlike
| today’s keyboards, where the distance keys travel is based on feedback
| principles, and the only force necessary is that needed to close a
| microswitch, keys on the Teletype (at least in memory) needed to travel
| over half an inch, and take the force necessary to run a small electric gener-
| ator such as those found on bicycles. You could break your knuckles touch
| typing on those beasts.
|
| If Dennis and Ken had a Selectric instead of a Teletype, we’d probably be
| typing “copy” and “remove” instead of “cp” and “rm.” Proof again that
| technology limits our choices as often as it expands them.
`----
Cheers,
Sven
Reply to: