From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 14 00:08:26 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 503291065674 for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 00:08:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tim@kientzle.com) Received: from monday.kientzle.com (99-115-135-74.uvs.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [99.115.135.74]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C9868FC08 for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 00:08:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: (from root@localhost) by monday.kientzle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) id pAE08KCW026183; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 00:08:20 GMT (envelope-from tim@kientzle.com) Received: from [192.168.2.119] (CiscoE3000 [192.168.1.65]) by kientzle.com with SMTP id k7cgzbziers4gy33b4je5d3fzw; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 00:08:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tim@kientzle.com) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 From: Tim Kientzle In-Reply-To: <4EC04B65.4030801@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2011 16:08:19 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: References: <20111110123919.GF2164@hoeg.nl> <4EBC4B6E.4060607@FreeBSD.org> <20111111112821.GP2164@hoeg.nl> <4EBDC06F.6020907@FreeBSD.org> <20111112103918.GV2164@hoeg.nl> <4EBF0003.3060401@FreeBSD.org> <20111113091940.GX2164@hoeg.nl> <4EC04B65.4030801@FreeBSD.org> To: Doug Barton X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1) Cc: Ed Schouten , arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: The strangeness called `sbin' X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 00:08:26 -0000 On Nov 13, 2011, at 2:57 PM, Doug Barton wrote: > > Actually I think a much more interesting, and likely more useful change > would be to put everything into /bin. I'm really confused, Doug. You've been vehemently arguing against merging /bin and /sbin, but here you seem to be claiming that it would be better to instead merge /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, and /usr/sbin. Care to clarify? Personally, I really like Ed's proposal. In part, that's from my personal experience of being highly annoyed whenever I use a Linux system that doesn't put /sbin into my path. If I always expect both /bin and /sbin to be in my path, then just combining them into one directory makes a whale of a lot of sense. I agree the transition issues are delicate, but we've dealt with equally difficult transition issues before. Tim