Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

4
  • 3
    While very interesting, none of this even tries to answer the question asked which was not about /opt and not about UNIX but about Linux. This is like answering "Why do cars have 4 wheels?" with "Bicycles have 2! Sadly, cars don't." which doesn't help the OP understand why cars have 4. Commented Feb 4, 2016 at 14:19
  • 2
    If you are unable to use the given explanation as an explanation to the background of Linux and the fact that Linux likes to mimic UNIX , you may be missing the needed background. Commented Feb 5, 2016 at 13:29
  • 1
    Interesting, but something I get confused on and which maybe is also only historical. Today, downloading a bin online, and a company bin isn't very different. If Joe Blow makes a program and I download it, why not put it in /opt/JowBlow/bin instead of /usr/local/bin. Is it a matter of trusted provider versus untrusted? It doesn't seem to make sense to me. Commented May 3, 2016 at 19:10
  • 1
    I wish I had known this 'exact' history a few years back. a) I wondered why AIX avoided /usr/local, uses /opt/IBM and /opt/ibm and bullfreeware uses /opt/freeware - and why I SHOULD have used a different path (not just /opt/*sbin). As to semi-relevance with Linux - better GNU tools - the default --prefix in auto-tools is /usr/local. Too bad autotools (automake, autoconf, etc. do not follow ... . But we all survive and learn where the distrub. || vendors put their programs. Commented Nov 24, 2016 at 9:00