Danek Duvall wrote:
> Yes, but it worked far too well, even for those supporting segregation. It
> led to customer dissatisfaction, and eventually we realized it was a
> mistake.
>
> My point is that we learned from /usr/sfw that people don't find things if
> they're not in /usr/bin. This implies that if we now decide to stick
> things in places other than /usr/bin, people won't find them, complain that
> Solaris doesn't provide the software they want, and cost us money and time.
>
> I think /usr/sfw is a *great* example of how not to do things.
>
> Danek
>
There have too many diversions along this discussion. Let's see where
at least you and
I stand. I believe:
In general, there are two directories for executables; /usr/bin and
/usr/sbin.
Ignoring the turmoil about what the semantic of /usr/sbin should be
changed
to, these have a well defined semantic. (Changing the semantic of
sbin is a
completely separable discussion.)
We have done the right thing in collapsing /usr/sfw/bin and
/usr/ccs/bin. One
was our mistake, while the other was AT&T's mistake. (Neither was crated
for typical reasons. We wanted sfw for not be on the PATH. The AT&T
UNIX group wanted to separate themselves from the development tools
guys.
It seems they didn't get along too well.)
Additional directories of executables are an appropriate
implementation for
"alternate programing environments" (xpg4, xpg6, gnu, ...). Access
to these
"alternate programing environments" are via the PATH. (Which is an
additional
argument for a system wide default PATH.)
Keeping on our "Solaris only" blinders, it would seem appropriate to
place games
in /usr/bin. (Others have asserted differently, I never did.)
The only thing I may disagree with requires that we take off our
"Solaris only" blinders.
Should we take in account the existing practices of Linux?
You cited "yea, what distro"? Good point. We should get a bit more
data on that.
Should we follow the intent of the LSB and the guidelines there in?
Frankly, with all the things we should do suggested in this thread, we
should answer
the "LSB relevance" question. I'm getting very tired of "Linux
familiarity" being
considered or not depending on the particular bias of the proposal
submitter or
reviewer (ie: ME).
Anyway, are you and I in sync with every except the "Solaris only"
blinders issues?
- jek3
