[ntp:questions] Unexpected executable locations from "sudo make install" on RPi Linux

Rob nomail at example.com
Fri Nov 15 18:22:51 UTC 2013

David Taylor <david-taylor at blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>> I was expecting all the executables to be in /usr/local/bin/.  Why might
>> this be?  Linux is not well known to me.
> Thanks to Trevor, Rob and Steve for your answers.  Whilst it may be 
> trivial for those familiar with the OS, it's not trivial for me as I 
> wouldn't know the search terms to look for.  I appreciate the time for 
> your responses.  This was with Linux 3.6.11

You *what* I find confusing?
Windows traditionally (well, since Windows 95 when they introduced
long filenames and were _so_proud_ that those could include spaces)
puts programs in "C:\Program Files".

When the 64-bit version was introduced, they apparently wanted to use
a different tree for 32-bit and 64-bit programs.  It has some merit
but generally it only is a nuisance.

However, what is really a mistake is that they did not introduce a
new place like "C:\Program Files 64" and kept the eixsting place for
legacy programs.
Now, a 32-bit program is installed in "C:\Program Files (x86)" when
it is 32-bit and the platform is 64-bit.  This makes it difficult
to use pre-made shortcuts, have directory names in scripts, etc.
(the environment variable %ProgramFiles% was similarly mistreated)

And the directory where most of the system libaries are stored is still
called %windir%\system32.  Even on a 64-bit system.

Linux uses some "64" directories, like /lib64, for things that need to
be separated between 32 and 64 bit.  But programs are not amongst that.

More information about the questions mailing list