On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 08:56:54PM +0100, Ingo Schwarze wrote: > > For example, on one small LAN with about 50 active users, i called > that place /usr/usta:
What does usta stand for? I did have stuff scattered about /root/bin, ~/bin, /usr/local/bin, but now have sort of settled on /usr/local/site/[s]bin, libexec,... for my local site specific scripts. I have /usr mounted ro, & /usr/local rw. As /usr/local/site has its own tree, I can backup everything below it, without using up loads of space as I would if I backed up /usr/local Also, I don't have to remember to add each new script in /usr/local/bin to a backup routine, I just backup /usr/local/site I dinnae ken if it the best, but it works for me. For 3rd party apps that I'm playing about with, I use /usr/local/myapp and symlink the relevant myapp/[s]bin/* items to /usr/local/[s]bin Again, I dinnae ken if it the best, but it works for me. One place I worked had a truely hideous /vol directory structure, various different admins had different ideas, so we had: /vol/admin/mailserver/bin/rekick /vol/mail/etrn/flush /vol/dns/rekick/bin /vol/export/user/mail /vol/home/ ... ugh...., nothing was consistant /vol was a NFS netapp, so all eggs in one basket there.
