[Linux-disciples] /usr/bin v. /usr/local/bin

[Stephen R Laniel]

Someone enquired on the debian-user list where he should put
a script that he wants to be accessible to all users. I
replied that I thought /usr/bin was the canonical answer
there. A few others replied that /usr/local/bin would be the
way to go.

Now, hier(5) says

       /usr/local
	      This is where programs which are local to the site typically go.

       /usr/local/bin
	      Binaries for programs local to the site.

This isn't so clear to me: what does 'local to the site' in
this case mean? Is the idea that /usr/bin might be
NFS-mounted, so that the binaries might exist on another
machine, whereas /usr/local/bin is always guaranteed to be
here on this hard drive? And if that's what it means, what
does this have to do with making a script available to all
users?

Can someone clarify the role of /usr/local for me?

-- 
Stephen R. Laniel
steve at laniels.org
+(617) 308-5571
http://laniels.org/
PGP key: http://laniels.org/slaniel.key
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.bostoncoop.net/pipermail/linux-disciples/attachments/20050930/15252901/attachment.pgp