0

I run Apache http servers on Red Hat and Oracle Linux machines. The account requires that only packages from the Red Hat or Oracle repositories be used. That’s fine , they work and are reasonably current. So a new SA joined and was shocked and amazed that the apachectl script and httpd image are being put into /usr/sbin, stating that in all the years they’ve been running Unix systems none ever were done like that and it’s a contravention of the Unix way.

Well I don’t really care one way or the other but maybe he has a point. Does anyone know why Red Hat chose this arrangement?

Improve this question
6
  • 1
    your colleague seems to be more of an expert on the Unix ways than the oldest still significant commercial Linux distribution; but you can't argue through convention when the oldest player in the field of Linux servers has a different one. In other words, this is your new colleague playing the dogma card against something that's been around for nearly 30 years today; his surprise might simply be something he needs to personally deal with. In the end, where to put binaries is but an opinion, so I'm honestly not sure what to say here: someone at redhat found that place good. Commented Apr 8, 2024 at 22:06
  • 2
    That seems to be the normal place for a server process, that doesn't need to run in early boot, and is installed by the OS vendor. What was the alternative given? /usr/local/bin/ ? That might be a matter of bein used to the old division of apps coming in from a vendor after the OS. Commented Apr 8, 2024 at 22:43
  • 1
    Traditionally, /usr/sbin was reserved for statically linked binaries that were the bare minimum to get the system up and running (like init and mount). Later, it became a super-user-only directory, where executables that you'd want in the root user's $PATH but not a "normal" user's. Many daemons live there, httpd being one of them. I don't know where your colleague would expect them to be, maybe /usr/libexec? I dunno if that is an Ubuntu-ism, but I don't recall having it back in the old days of SunOS and other systems I used in the late 1900s. Commented Apr 8, 2024 at 23:06
  • 1
    Thank you all for your responses. I think my colleague is a bit “out over his skis” on this. I guess he’s looking to establish a reputation. Apache does it a bit differently, the installations from the Apache binaries I’ve done kept it all within the base folder, creating a <homefolder>/bin directory. So Red Hat is modifying the original but even that differs a bit from where my colleague wants it. At least I’ve gained some perspective. Commented Apr 9, 2024 at 5:14
  • 1
    @AaronD.Marasco FWIW /sbin was where "getting started" statically compiled tools lived, 'cos /usr was frequently a separate mount point (so /usr/sbin wouldn't be accessible). SunOS 4 didn't even have a /usr/sbin :-) Commented Apr 9, 2024 at 11:42

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
1

Your colleague seems not to have used any modern Linux in a long time.

The Linux Filesystem Hierarchy Standard assigns the following directories:

  • /bin Essential command binaries for all users
  • /sbin Essential system binaries, system administration commands
  • /usr User utilities and applications
  • /usr/bin Non-essential command binaries for all users
  • /usr/sbin Non-essential system binaries for daemons and services (e.g. web servers)

So, this is something Red Hat has been doing for a while now. Other distros might do that differently. It's a moot point to argue where the "right" place is.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.