Re: Incorrect order of /usr/bin and /usr/sbin in path

On 05/05/2014 10:28 AM, Adam Jackson wrote: >On Sun, 2014-05-04 at 18:59 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: > >>however, the semantics of /usr/sbin is to contain superuser >>binaries which should not be overriden because a binary >>with the same name exists in /usr/bin > >My memory is that the "s" was more for "static" not "superuser". >There's some conceptual overlap, static binaries being there to recover >even if your shared libraries are hosed which is normally a "superuser" >kind of operation, but. My recollection is that the "s" in /sbin and /usr/sbin was more "system" level management. Things an admin would need but would not usually be needed by an ordinary user. Binaries in /bin and /sbin would have been statically linked to aid in recovering a system in single-user mode when /usr might not be mounted, in the days when disks were so small that /usr might often be a separate disk.