On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 04:25:26PM +0000, Thomas Schweikle wrote: [...] > This was never the reason for "/bin" vs. "/sbin". "/sbin" held just tools > needed to startup the system and mount the rest. No. You needed *both* /bin and /sbin for start up; /usr/bin and /usr/sbin could come later. One prominent example: /bin/sh. No shell, no system. It's pretty well explained here [1]. The difference between "s" and no "s" was "system" vs. "user". And this wasn't done to "keep the users from messing with the system"; rather to not clutter the user's path with programs (s)he couldn't use anyway. Cheers [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filesystem_Hierarchy_Standard -- t
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature