From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 14 01:38:57 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 4E1F1106566B; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 01:38:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mike@mail.karels.net) Received: from mail.karels.net (mail.karels.net [63.231.190.5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D24088FC0A; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 01:38:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.karels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.karels.net (8.14.3/8.13.6) with ESMTP id pAE11XEa067064; Sun, 13 Nov 2011 19:01:33 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from mike@mail.karels.net) Message-Id: <201111140101.pAE11XEa067064@mail.karels.net> To: Doug Barton From: Mike Karels In-reply-to: Your message of Sun, 13 Nov 2011 16:21:03 -0800. <4EC05EEF.5030908@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2011 19:01:33 -0600 Sender: mike@karels.net Cc: arch@freebsd.org, Tim Kientzle , Ed Schouten Subject: Re: The strangeness called `sbin' X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: mike@karels.net 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 01:38:57 -0000 I have to agree with Doug. If the directories were unified and we were proposing splitting them based on efficiency, I would say it is not worth doing. However, the directories are separate now, and I don't see sufficient benefit from combining them. fwiw, I think at least 90% of the users at work do not have /sbin and /usr/sbin in their paths now, and they do not need them. (Yes, there are still multi-user systems, and not everyone is a sysadmin.) I think this is a solution in search of a problem. Mike