On 10/02/18 20:06, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 2:52 PM, Kai Krakow <hurikha...@gmail.com> wrote:
Am Sat, 10 Feb 2018 19:38:56 +0000 schrieb Wols Lists:
On 10/02/18 18:56, Kai Krakow wrote:
role and /usr takes the role of /, and /home already took the role of
/usr (that's why it's called /usr, it was user data in early unix). The
Actually no, not at all. /usr is not short for USeR, it's an acronym for
User System Resources, which is why it contains OS stuff, not user
stuff. Very confusing, I know.
From https://www.tldp.org/LDP/Linux-Filesystem-Hierarchy/html/usr.html:
In the original Unix implementations, /usr was where the home
directories of the users were placed (that is to say, /usr/someone was
then the directory now known as /home/someone). In current Unices, /usr
is where user-land programs and data (as opposed to 'system land'
programs and data) are. The name hasn't changed, but it's meaning has
narrowed and lengthened from "everything user related" to "user usable
programs and data". As such, some people may now refer to this
directory as meaning 'User System Resources' and not 'user' as was
originally intended.
So, actually the acronym was only invented later to represent the new
role of the directory. ;-)
A bit more of history here:
http://www.osnews.com/story/25556/Understanding_the_bin_sbin_usr_bin_usr_sbin_Split
Fascinating. And I made a typo, which is interesting too - I always knew
it as Unix System Resources - typing "user" was a mistake ... I wonder
how much weird info is down to mistakes like that :-)
Cheers,
Wol
