zlacker

>>csmant+(OP)
Sometime around 2000 someone decided that /bin and /sbin isn't enough to boot and mount the rest of the system, so they added further complexity: an initrd/initramfs that does the basic job of /bin and /sbin. They had to complicate the kernel build process, the kernel update, the bootloader, the kernel command line and for what? Just because they didn't want the kernel to have the storage drivers built-in?

So the /bin /sbin became redundant.

Sometime around 2020 someone observed that no current Linux can boot without /usr anyway. So what did they do? Move everything from /usr to / and drop the whole /usr legacy? Noooo, that would be too simple. Move / to /usr. And because that is still too simple, also move /bin, /sbin and /usr/sbin to /usr/bin, and then keep symlinks at the old locations because who's gonna fix hardcoded paths in 99% of all Linux apps anyway??

Oh, how I wish I was born in the '60s, when the world was still sane.

>>M95D+qx
> So what did they do? Move everything from /usr to / and drop the whole /usr legacy? Noooo, that would be too simple.

It's a lot simpler to merge them in a directory that can be mounted across multiple machines than have four separate mountpoints.

>>Starle+fG
Mount-points were key to early history of the split. Nowadays it's more about not breaking shebangs.

Nearly every shell script starts with "#!/bin/sh", so you can't drop /bin. Similarly, nearly every python script starts with "#!/usr/bin/env python", so you can't drop /usr/bin.

Hence symlink.