What is Digg?68 Comments
- D3koy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+52Anyone else under the impression that "skill2die4@yahoo.com" doesn't actually own the copyright, and just likes the logo?
- Urusai, on 10/10/2007, -6/+33This sucks. The layout is bad (look at the right side), and why the hell is EVERYTHING IN CAPS? UNIX is case sensitive. Not a single directory name is correct, technically.
- schestowitz, on 10/10/2007, -2/+28Seems like a splog.
http://www.secguru.com/files/linux_file_structure. ...
http://www.www.tuxmachines.org/blog/1?page=3 - cplusplus, on 10/10/2007, -2/+22Should have /sys and as others have mentioned use the proper case. And for the love of Gawd use PNG instead of JPEG.
- geckooooo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15A marvel of logical organization.
- stmiller, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13Linux ver. 0.0.1 layout:
http://www.fibel.org/linux/lfo-0.6.0-1/img8.png - MateyO, on 10/10/2007, -3/+14It's not Linux, and it's not complete. Linux has /proc (system state info)
- sebnukem, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10"temperory"
- SEJeff, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10Anyone that wants to understand all of this should just read the FHS aka Filesystem Heirarchy Standard:
http://www.pathname.com/fhs
It was rolled into the LSB (Linux Standard Base) and pretty much all distros use it. - ropers, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6The same information presented properly: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filesystem_Hierarchy_ ...
- Phlosten, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8Blog spam and dodgy anyway. Buried!
- stimpack, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Take a look at GoboLinux for a modern rethink of the LFS.
- Moriya, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5*****, I just got Rickroll'd
- ThomasOkken, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4/usr/sbin = non-essential binaries?!?
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Some older UNIX systems only had upper-case, you can still see this in practice, try logging into your Linux terminal with capslock on, everything will go uppercase.
- zephyrxero, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4yeah, this would be more properly listed as the common Unix file system hierarchy, which Linux merely inherited.
- freexe, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4What are the /usr/sbin and /usr/local/sbin /usr/local/bin directories for then?
I don't like the windows file system, but apple seem to have a better system than both windows and linux. At least in terms of the end user, you just drag the application into the Applications directory and your done. And you delete it by removing that application. Seems more logical than 100 directories to me. - darkNiGHTS, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Thanks Captain Obvious.
- noisey, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3in the ./program files/ directory :)
j/k, in the /opt directory - maclauk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3In addition to all the other shortcomings mentioned above I should add :
1) The background isn't white, which makes printing it lousy
2) JPG is the wrong format to use for this type of picture, use GIF or PNG instead and you don't get the artefacts around edges
Buried for doing half the job on what is a good idea. - zerblat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3/usr/local is for stuff you install manually (typically stuff that you compile yourself). /usr is for stuff that's installed by your package manager (assuming you use one). /opt is for "add-on applications" -- typically software from third parties, using custom installation methods, or simply software that wants to be installed in its own selfcontained directory. /usr/share/bin doesn't make any sense.
- freexe, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Why not just have one directory? Lets call it '/apps'? You put all the applications in there.
Or you have 2 directories, one calleds '/apps' which has all the applcaitions that have a nice GUI and are in the nice start bar that KDE and Gnome have and another called /sys/apps for all the system apps and little program that run n the background for the average end user.
All the fancy GUI programs could be self-contained archieves that you just have to drag into the apps directory for them to be installed. If they want to store user data then put it in a /home/usr/.appname folder. Software would be easier to install then.
The file system and installation process are the only things that really bugs me about linux. - furrier, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4For the kiddies on here, this has nothing to do with Linux. Linux is just a variant of an implementation of UNIX, and uses a similar file structure.
- init100, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2"Why not just have one directory? Lets call it '/apps'? You put all the applications in there."
There are several reasons. First, some admins might want to put various parts of the file and directory hierarchy on different partitions. Some use a separate partition for /usr, many use a separate partition for /home and /var, and so on. Before all separate filesystems have been mounted, you can only count on the programs in /bin being available, since /bin is never on a separate partition, it is always in the root filesystem.
Then there is the issue of collisions. You don't want a binary that you compiled yourself mistakenly overwriting one installed by the package manager. That would be bound to create problems, so to avoid that, files managed by the package manager are separate from those that you compile yourself (unless you explicitly tells it to do otherwise). - sdubois92, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3where are the applications saved?
- init100, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Then what is an "application"? Is Bash an application? Is Perl an application? Is X.org an application? The difference between "applications" and "system programs" is somewhat diffuse in Linux.
- flashingcurser, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2No kidding. It stands for "S(ystem) BIN(aries)"
non-essential? wtf? - Lorian, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Try /opt
- 0KonTroL0, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3How the beep did this get on the front page? :S
- ScottWC, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Then you're looking in the wrong place. The image doesn't even have /media or /proc. Better place to start would be wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filesystem_Hierarchy_ ...
Better Digg RSS: http://pipes.yahoo.com/pipes/pipe.run?_id=YNoDa9ln ... - scilec, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I'm surprised by now that people who write apps still can't agree where to put them. I still see some stuff going into /usr/local/bin, /usr/share/bin/ /usr/bin/ and /opt. I also continue to see interesting locations for tomcat and jdk.
- dareiff, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4This is not helpful. At all. Short, 1 - 2 sentence explanations would be helpful. This, is definitely, not that.
- chacotacoz, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4I know all you Linux uber admins think this is gay but I've been looking for a simple explanation of this for what seems like forever. Thanks for the post.
- freexe, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2But where am I suppose to install programs? I download some deskbar software from the internet, and have no idea what directory it's suppose to go in.
- bigtomrodney, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1To be fair, while there is so much wrong with this picture Linux has only had the /media directory as standard for a couple of years (3?). Before that it was all done in /mnt.
- Kardall, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Agree'd, I see he's at -8 now... i'm Digging his comment up because I fell for it...
- tribble222, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I just get "Access Denied" with Debian
- coldfusion1970, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Now if only someone would do one for OSX.
- CoheednCambria, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Ditto
- init100, on 10/15/2007, -1/+2"this archaic, horribly designed file system hierarchy needs to be done away with for a more modern, well designed approach"
I guess you mean those marvelous drive letters and such eloquent names as "C:Documents and Settings" or "C:Linux". :) - thomashauk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Non essential stuff that requires high privileges, like a GUI partition editor. System but not essential.
- dsoltesz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I'm a bit disturbed that the blogger doesn't provide proper credit or history for a 5+ year old diagram, though credit for leaving the copyright notice in place. Aside from that issue and the diagramming skills of the creator, it's a somewhat useful diagram, just nothing to digg home about.
- fattony80, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1use shift to reverse your case sensitive password :)
- doublebummer, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"never gonna tell a lie and hurt you"
If only it were true. - jussipupu, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1/opt is all wrong, too.
- CircleFusion, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Wait...
ext2fs determines the directory structure? - siciliano, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1no it was "TEMPERORY" lol
- iduggden, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Thats a better link
- strredwolf, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0This is just a Unix file placement layout, not the ext2fs structure layout!
- thomashauk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Synaptic for you...
-
Show 51 - 66 of 66 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 
