default path
in [Shell]
|
Prev: YANQUI courts were ALWAYS K A N G A R O O Courts - thats how they carried out GENOCIDE of NATIVES !!!
Next: CONTROLLED DEMOLITION INC explosive-charge placement technician Tom Sullivan 911 TESTIMONIAL Video
From: John Kelly on 30 Jun 2010 17:48 On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 23:37:52 +0200, Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >On 30/06/10 22:59, John Kelly wrote: >> Putting /usr/bin ahead of /bin in your path, causes an extra path search >> every time you invoke sed, or any other common utility. >>Shouldn't that be covered by cashing ("hashing", "tracked alias")? >I.e., without sacrificing the path precedence (overriding) feature. Only if you have that shell feature enabled, which may not be desirable. -- Web mail, POP3, and SMTP http://www.beewyz.com/freeaccounts.php
From: Sven Mascheck on 30 Jun 2010 19:55 Janis Papanagnou wrote: > Am I reading that correctly; that you confirm my memories for those > commercial Unix systems (AIX, HP-UX, and SunOS) that I worked on? Hm, well, sorry for the media break? Yes, /bin links to /usr/bin at least on AIX 3.2.4-5.3, HP-UX 10.x-11.31, SunOS 4.1.4-5.11, but AFAIK not on HP-UX 8.07-9.03 (which I'd count as virtually historic). > Cygwin is probably no good example, but there you have equal /bin > and /usr/bin contents as well. It's defintely missing in the list, yet.
From: Seebs on 1 Jul 2010 23:05 On 2010-06-30, Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > Seebs schrieb: >> [...] >> More generally, the same pattern applies to any other bin directory; if >> you have a bin directory that's specific to a working project, or a personal >> bin directory, it's put in front of /usr/local, which is in turn in front >> of plain /usr/bin and /bin, [...] > Curious; are there systems where /usr/bin and /bin are not equivalent > (or even identical [by one directory linking the other])? Yes, many. > I don't recall having worked on a Unix system with different contents > in those two directories. Which is funny, because I can't think of one where they're the same. I only have Linux, OS X, and BSD to check, but all three, they're separate. By convention, /bin is part of the rootfs, but /usr is a separate file system in some designs, so /usr/bin holds stuff that's not necessary during early boot but is pretty essential later. -s -- Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam(a)seebs.net http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
From: Janis Papanagnou on 2 Jul 2010 03:52 On 02/07/10 05:05, Seebs wrote: > On 2010-06-30, Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> Seebs schrieb: >>> [...] >>> More generally, the same pattern applies to any other bin directory; if >>> you have a bin directory that's specific to a working project, or a personal >>> bin directory, it's put in front of /usr/local, which is in turn in front >>> of plain /usr/bin and /bin, [...] > >> Curious; are there systems where /usr/bin and /bin are not equivalent >> (or even identical [by one directory linking the other])? > > Yes, many. > >> I don't recall having worked on a Unix system with different contents >> in those two directories. > > Which is funny, because I can't think of one where they're the same. I > only have Linux, OS X, and BSD to check, but all three, they're separate. Is your BSD a FreeBSD, or else, what version? Someone pointed out here that it wouldn't apply to Sun's OS (which was, as SunOS [4.x], also based on BSD before becoming Solaris). See also Sven's reply in this thread. It seems that depending on the perspective one looks at the topic, coming from the commercial Unixes (as I do) or from the open source Unixes (as it's common nowadays), one may get only a partially correct view on the topic. Janis > [...]
From: David Combs on 27 Jul 2010 01:35
Or, if you want complete, EXPLICIT control of whose version gets called, I've done this kludge: Put "my-bin-symlinks-DIR" at the HEAD (first) of PATH. Then, in that dir, for, say, "rm", make it a SYMLINK to YOUR "rm". That way, when you say "rm", it runs through PATH, looking for an "rm", and FINDS IT, in your kludge-symlink directory. Warning: when you (before 10) do a ufsdump, you will likely have only one or two disk partitions "up" -- just make sure that that rm symlink points into a during-backup mounted partition. The Advantage of this litle scheme is that what version (and owner) gets run IS TOTALLY OBVIOUS -- SELF DOCUMENTED. And, if some binary verion you want to override say "rm" is off on a NOT-mounted-at-backup-time disk, then just COPY that binary to some central place for such binaries, which place WILL be mounted, even during backup (and restore). And, it's dead simple. David |