On Thu, Aug 17, 2000 at 11:48:06AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > (I am sure one can come up with some reason for moving every single > probgram out of sbin, and thus lose all the benefits of the split).
Could you remind me what these benefits are again? Pretend for a moment that the FHS doesn't exist and it's entirely up to us. What exactly DO we gain by having some binaries segregated off into sbin? > route is in sbin. period. This begs the question. > If people wat to see the current > routing status, they have two options: > a) add /sbin to your path, or type in the full path name > b) install netstat. So why isn't netstat in sbin? > You can't please veryone all the time. In attempting to please > the semi-sysadmin power user you are going to remove a feature that > benefits the absolute novice. Again, please tell me what these benefits are. Do you have anything approaching quantifiable data or a testable hypothesis? > Any semi-sysadmin/power user types should also be > knowledegable enough to modify their path variables. Or create an > alias. Or a symlink. Indeed, if you use it often enough, _do_ change > the path. But do not assume that what is good for you is good for > everyone else. I think a set of rational and intuitive grounds for determining what goes into sbin is good for everyone. ping is in bin, traceroute is in sbin; netstat is in bin, route is in sbin... > Branden> In other words, I think the choice of directory should be > Branden> controlled by factors intrinsic, not extrinsic, to the > Branden> program in question. > > To a point. But I think making this an absolute rule is going > too far. Please identify the extrinsic factors that you think trump the characteristics of the actual program. -- G. Branden Robinson | Religion is something left over from the Debian GNU/Linux | infancy of our intelligence; it will [EMAIL PROTECTED] | fade away as we adopt reason and science http://www.debian.org/~branden/ | as our guidelines. -- Bertrand Russell
pgpNSWbbjN139.pgp
Description: PGP signature