Am Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:20:16 +0000 schrieb Wol's lists: > 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 :-)
You should trust your hidden secret skills more... :-D -- Regards, Kai Replies to list-only preferred.
