>Does anyone mind if we (slowly) move binaries from $out/sbin to $out/bin? > >Arguments for doing it: > >1) The sbin vs bin distinction is an historic relic from the past. It >makes little sense on NixOS. (Even a normal (LSB-like) distro like >ArchLinux has already made the sbin -> bin switch). > >2) It's annoying to have this distinction when writing nix >expressions, having to figure out which of the two directories is the >correct one for *this* package. > >3) I just found my second sbin/bin bug caused by sbin being treated as >a second class citizen in nixpkgs. I noticed that our standard builder >will not add packages' sbin/ directory to PATH. (The first issue was >from a long time ago, when sbin wasn't added to PATH by the profile.sh >script (maybe wrong name) when on a non-NixOS distro.)
Personally, I support gradual move to having everything in $path/bin/ Among other benefits, when I do a rescue or a complex test, I sometimes need to set PATH manually, and having only /bin/ makes it simpler. I would like to ask whether moving /sbin/ contents to /bin/ contents and creating a sbin → bin symlink is a good idea. Our initrd already does this. For some packages many third-party tools expect them in some directory like $PREFIX/sbin and with move+symlink we can get benefits now and pay the price case-by-case. Maybe we'll even keep the symlink for a long time. _______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev