Lars Hecking spoke thusly:
>>> feel-alike. Like linux, /usr/sbin is a DIRTY LIE, and doesn't contain
>> statically linked binaries, but misc supervisor ones.
>> sbin = system binaries. I don't perceive this as a dirty lie.
in addition /sbin doesn't need to have static executables, it just
needs to not depend on /usr. on most unicies i've used it hasn't,
though some fancy config tools on redhat need /usr/lib (but if /usr
is hosed you probably aren't configuring sendmail...)
(as an aside i find linuxconf to be a bloated mess - it's responsible
for all the /usr dependant libs in /sbin)
kevin
Maintained by the ILUG website team. The aim of Linux.ie is to
support and help commercial and private users of Linux in Ireland. You can
display ILUG news in your own webpages, read backend
information to find out how. Networking services kindly provided by HEAnet, server kindly donated by
Dell. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds,
used with permission. No penguins were harmed in the production or maintenance
of this highly praised website. Looking for the
Indian Linux Users' Group? Try here. If you've read all this and aren't a lawyer: you should be!
