Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 20 Sep 2000 08:50:32 GMT
From:      Salvo Bartolotta <bartequi@inwind.it>
To:        Mark Ovens <marko@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: docs/21057: Little correction of hier(8)
Message-ID:  <20000920.8503200@bartequi.ottodomain.org>
References:  <20000919004737.B3924@parish>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

On 9/19/00, 12:47:37 AM, Mark Ovens <marko@freebsd.org> wrote regarding
Re: docs/21057: Little correction of hier(8):


> On Fri, 08 Sep 2000 08:56:17 GMT, Salvo Bartolotta wrote:

> > Dear FreeBSD doc'ers,
> >
> > In my quest for the Holy Grail, ahem, for the origin of the /usr
> > "acronym", I received the following letter from Chris Coleman:
> >
> > --------------------- Forwarded Message -------------------------
> >
> > At the moment, I cannot recall where I got that tid bit of
> > information. Regardless of whether it originally stood for "user" or=

> > not, calling it "User" would confuse new users..  Currently, the Uni=
x
> > System Resources live there and that is what it should be called.
> > (IMHO)
> >
> > I may be alone in this definition, but that definition is at least 4=

> > years old. I never questioned it.  (Although, I may not be alone,
> > because I have been propigating that definition for the last 3-4
> > years.)
> >
> > I found this definition in my searching, which may be more correct.
> >
> > Mount point for sharable user commands, libraries, and documentation=
.
> > http://www.kelley.iu.edu/shyu/hpguide.html#files
> >
> > Still, I'd prefer to keep using the Unix System Resources as a good
> > acronym to help people remember and distinguish between "user" files=

> > and "system" files.
> >
> > Feel Free to forward this to -doc if it helps any.

> I prefer Unix System Resources as well, however, in The Unix
> Programming Environment by Kernighan & Pike (1984) I find:

> p22:      "On many systems, /usr is a directory that contains the
>            directories of all the users of the system."

> p48:      "/usr is often the top directory of the user filesystem
>            (user is abbreviated to usr in the same spirit as cmp,
>            ls, etc.)."

> p64 (Table 2.1):

>            /usr       user file system

> p65:       "/usr is called the `user file system', although it may
>             have little to do with the actual users of the system."

> So, what is the correct answer? Should I commit this PR, or just close=

> it. It shouldn't be left lying around.




Dear Mark Ovens,

You are [most probably] right; the evidence you have given should be
the ultimate historical answer.

Chris himself pointed out that he was not quite sure about the origin
of the "acronym" in question.

I was wondering whether something like the following would do: "...
originally abbreviated to usr in the same terse/concise [Unix]
style/spirit as ls, cmp etc.; subsequently reinterpreted as Unix
System Resources. The latter meaning seems to be more appropriate to
the current [Free]BSD filesystem layout [...]".

Unless other evidence and comments are provided, something like the
foregoing seems (to me) a sensible choice. But ... beware of my
English, I am Italian, after all :-)

Best regards,
Salvo





To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000920.8503200>