Im pretty sure the /usr directory has been around longer than 5 years. I was just making the point that the /usr directory says nothing informative about its contents. For example: Mac has /Users. That is pretty informative. It stores user profiles. So /usr must too, right? No. Not even close. According to your wiki article, it is a "*Secondary hierarchy* for read-only user data; contains the majority of (multi-<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-user>)user utilities and applications." Intuitive, no? I thought so.
And in Windows, you store software in "Program Files". I will bag on Windoze like the next guy, but that's more logical than /usr. My point is that these legacy unix conventions could use a UI overhaul. I know it will never happen, since every *nix program built since the dawn of time relies on conventions like these, but I'm glad to see Mac has at least started down that path (see /Applications, /Library, /Developer, /Users, etc). But this is a rant for a different thread. :) <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filesystem_Hierarchy_Standard#cite_note-10> -- Adam Grant Lead Web Engineer Telaeris, Inc. [email protected] (858) 627-9710 On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Darren Boyd <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 12:08 PM, Adam Grant <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> PS: Is anyone else confused by the legacy convention of using /usr/local >> or /opt as the place to install software programs? Some things in *nix >> should be taken out back and put down... >> >> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filesystem_Hierarchy_Standard > > The current version is from 2004, so it's hardly legacy. > > Where would you put software instead? > > > -- > SD Ruby mailing list > [email protected] > http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby > -- SD Ruby mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby
