WelcomeWelcome | FAQFAQ | DownloadsDownloads | WikiWiki

Author Topic: [Solved] why are links to busybox applets scattered across four directories?  (Read 2632 times)

Offline GNUser

  • Wiki Author
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1509
I noticed that links to BB applets are scattered across /usr/bin, /usr/sbin, /bin, and /sbin. Given TCL's anti-scatter philosophy, I was a bit surprised by this. I was expecting one directory or two at the most (e.g., links for busybox applets in /bin, links for busybox.suid applets in /sbin).

The question is motivated by curiosity, not criticism. I'm sure there is a practical or historical reason for this, which would be interesting to know.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2020, 12:06:07 AM by Rich »

Offline Rich

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11619
Re: why are links to busybox applets scattered across four directories?
« Reply #1 on: November 28, 2020, 10:05:52 PM »
Hi GNUser
Just a guess, but maybe some programs had  /usr/bin  and  /usr/sbin  hard coded into them.

Offline andyj

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1036
Re: why are links to busybox applets scattered across four directories?
« Reply #2 on: November 28, 2020, 10:48:15 PM »
Traditionally, /usr is a separate file system from /, so the programs in /bin and /sbin would be available even if no other disks were mounted. Putting everything from /usr/bin and /usr/sbin into /bin and /sbin would fill up the boot disk. This isn't really an issue anymore, but us old timers know it used to be.

Offline GNUser

  • Wiki Author
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1509
Re: why are links to busybox applets scattered across four directories?
« Reply #3 on: November 28, 2020, 11:42:17 PM »
Thank you, andyj. Very interesting. I suspected it was a historical reason. Relative newcomers to *nix such as myself (I've been a happy GNU/Linux user since 2012) have a hard time imagining such scenarios :o

Thread can be marked as Solved.

P.S. Would it add value to TCL to reduce the number of directories for binaries in base system? I realize the cost would be real (work to change it, possible side effects, loss of a historical feature) for only an aesthetic gain (decreased complexity of filesystem hierarchy).
« Last Edit: November 28, 2020, 11:50:22 PM by GNUser »

Offline xor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1268
Re: why are links to busybox applets scattered across four directories?
« Reply #4 on: November 29, 2020, 12:00:33 AM »
(as usual I write with google translate :)

from different geographies, different countries,
and as people speaking different languages,
Even if we overlooked even the issues that each other opened
as if there is a common collective consciousness :)

Regarding the subject, please review the other topic I have opened.

? the hardcore of utopic minimalism ? how should a really minimalist linux be !?
http://forum.tinycorelinux.net/index.php?topic=24514.msg155482#msg155482


I will add a more technical criticism thesis report to the forum soon :)



Offline curaga

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11044
Historically the binaries have always been there, so many scripts have hardcoded paths. This means any unification would still need symlinks for those dirs, kinda defeating the purpose.
The only barriers that can stop you are the ones you create yourself.

Offline GNUser

  • Wiki Author
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1509
Unification with symlinks would be ugly, worse than current situation in a way. Oh, well. Thanks, guys!

Offline xor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1268
I have a solution suggestion,
but I guess nobody takes me seriously!

Unification with symlinks would be ugly, worse than current situation in a way. Oh, well. Thanks, guys!