Il 16/11/18 23:44, Harald Arnesen ha scritto:
> Irrwahn [11/16/18 9:10 PM]:
>
>> On System V Release 4 and later /bin has already been a symlink to
>> /usr/bin, and Solaris implemented the /usr merge about a decade ago.
>> Effectively, only some Unices and some Linux based distributions are
>> the odd ones out in that respect.
> And all the BSDs, macOS,...


  You just reminded me one of the reasons because I do not run any of those.


https://www.reddit.com/r/BSD/comments/2szofc/eli5_why_is_separating_binaries_into_bin_sbin/


"

    ELI5: Why is separating binaries into /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin,
    /usr/sbin, /usr/local/bin, /usr/local/sbin a good thing?

Whenever I ask anyone what the advangages of BSD are, I invariably get
the answer that all binaries, configurations etc. all reside inside
/usr/local/{bin,etc,share,sbin,man...}. I understand the ideology behind
doing this (keeping the base system separate and all) but I don't
understand the practical advantages.

It is even said that this makes the BSDs somehow advantageous when
installing and removing multiple desktop environments. This doesn't make
any sense to me. The location of the files installed by a package should
not matter because the package manager keeps the location of the
installed files in its database. In other words, when I want to
uninstall GNOME, my package manager figures out what packages are
installed by the GNOME group and removes the files those packages
installed. To the package manager, it doesn't matter which directory
those files are in because it knows where it put them when it installed
the package in the first place.

I'm very sorry if I'm wholly misunderstanding this concept and I'm more
than happy to be corrected.

Thanks!"



--
Alessandro Selli <alessandroselli@???>
VOIP SIP: dhatarattha@???
Chiave firma e cifratura PGP/GPG signing and encoding key:
BA651E4050DDFC31E17384BABCE7BD1A1B0DF2AE