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