[TUHS] /bin vs /sbin

[Grant Taylor]

On 7/21/20 7:16 PM, tytso at mit.edu wrote:
> Yeah, that's definitely not right.  /sbin had been around for 
> "essential system binaries" long before Linux, and Linux took it 
> from there.

I'm sorry, I think there has been a misunderstanding.  I did not mean to 
imply that Linux influenced the larger Unix community with /sbin. 
Rather the other way around, that that's the time that Linux had been 
influenced about /sbin.

> You can see this from the Linux Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (earlier 
> named fsstnd, which specified /sbin as "essential system binaries").

I should revisit that, particularly in light of an older name and use.

> SunOS used that nomenclature and the GNU tools all used /sbin for 
> that purpose.

Did Solaris follow in SunOS's foot steps?  Or did Solaris do something 
different?

> The other thing I'd again urge is that you not take HJ Lu's boot/root 
> disks as being influencial after early 1992.

Okay.  I naively thought that HJ Lu's boot/root was falling out of favor 
in '93, a year later.  Thank you for clarifying Warner.



-- 
Grant. . . .
unix || die

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4013 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20200721/4f239705/attachment.bin>