/usr/local/bin vs /usr/bin and Kazehakase vs Firefox

Paingiver · 2008-03-15 10:58:33

When you install an application to /usr/bin will it be more faster than installed on /usr/local/bin?

I have Firefox installed in /usr/bin and Kazehakase installed to /usr/local/bin. And it seems that Firefox is faster than Kazehakase. Why?

Last edited by Paingiver (2008-03-15 11:11:48)

shining · 2008-03-15 11:00:54

That's indeed a lot of pain you give us.

hacosta · 2008-03-15 11:03:16

maybe firefox is faster than kazehakase and it has nothing to do with the installation directory

Edit: Typo

Last edited by hacosta (2008-03-15 20:53:59)

Paingiver · 2008-03-15 11:08:58

I have read an article some time ago.It was mentioning that the system uses /sbin and /bin directory for important and fast-opening-need executables.And gives another binary directory for less important files.
And everyone suggest Kazehakase for older machines and praise it's speed.

dyscoria · 2008-03-15 11:31:09

I read an article also that said if you put a symlink to the firefox executable in your home directory, it can execute faster cuz your in your home directory already and it can be found faster. and also, if you rename it to 'f', there's only one letter to read so it can execute even faster.

DonVla · 2008-03-15 11:40:58

Paingiver wrote:

...
and fast-opening-need executables....

that's total crap....
http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html

Endperform · 2008-03-15 11:45:54

Location has nothing to do with speed. At all, unless you have some weird configuration where you have /usr/bin mounted on one disk and /usr/local/bin mounted on another, slower disk. Even then, the application itself would only be slow on disk access.

The notion that an application can be sped up by linking it in your home directory, or even renaming it to one letter is also crazy. Your install will search for an executable in the path specified in $PATH and then execute the first instance it finds, but this does NOT speed the application itself up.

dyscoria · 2008-03-15 11:48:40

Endperform wrote:

The notion that an application can be sped up by linking it in your home directory, or even renaming it to one letter is also crazy. Your install will search for an executable in the path specified in $PATH and then execute the first instance it finds, but this does NOT speed the application itself up.

No seriously, if you rename all your executables to one letter then your system runs like lightning!

* am i really that bad at sarcasm? *

Endperform · 2008-03-15 11:54:24

dyscoria wrote:

Endperform wrote:
The notion that an application can be sped up by linking it in your home directory, or even renaming it to one letter is also crazy. Your install will search for an executable in the path specified in $PATH and then execute the first instance it finds, but this does NOT speed the application itself up.
No seriously, if you rename all your executables to one letter then your system runs like lightning!
* am i really that bad at sarcasm? *

Yes, since there was no indication of sarcasm in your post. A or would have worked

dyscoria · 2008-03-15 11:57:15

NO, i wasn't being sarcastic.

Rename all your executables to one letter. No actually one number. Numbers are faster than letters.

bavardage · 2008-03-15 17:22:44

It's even faster if you name them only with ones and zeros, then the computer doesn't actually have to convert the filename to binary.

Endperform · 2008-03-16 00:48:39

Bah, just dump everything into one single directory. No searching needed!

Gruntz · 2008-03-16 06:50:18

@the people that think that /bin is faster then /usr/local/bin: What filesystem are you using?

schivmeister · 2008-03-16 08:38:52

No, really. Set your path to / and migrate ALL executables and binaries there. Rename them to correspond to each keyboard character, make sure to document it so you don't forget. Paste it as the wallpaper, either real on your bedroom wall or virtual on your computer wall. So when the time comes to call Firefox you type "F", Kamikazenokazehakaseomaenochikarada you type "K".

That way, it's really fast. This is not a joke.

If you want to have /usr/local, let it be for your own scripts and externally-installed software.

tomk · 2008-03-16 11:30:19

Yes.. fun, fun, fun. Anyway, the OP has been answered, and this thread is degenerating fast.
For ongoing nonsense, please report to the Off-topic board.
Closed.

Arch Linux

#1 2008-03-15 10:58:33

/usr/local/bin vs /usr/bin and Kazehakase vs Firefox

#2 2008-03-15 11:00:54

Re: /usr/local/bin vs /usr/bin and Kazehakase vs Firefox

#3 2008-03-15 11:03:16

Re: /usr/local/bin vs /usr/bin and Kazehakase vs Firefox

#4 2008-03-15 11:08:58

Re: /usr/local/bin vs /usr/bin and Kazehakase vs Firefox

#5 2008-03-15 11:31:09

Re: /usr/local/bin vs /usr/bin and Kazehakase vs Firefox

#6 2008-03-15 11:40:58

Re: /usr/local/bin vs /usr/bin and Kazehakase vs Firefox

#7 2008-03-15 11:45:54

Re: /usr/local/bin vs /usr/bin and Kazehakase vs Firefox

#8 2008-03-15 11:48:40

Re: /usr/local/bin vs /usr/bin and Kazehakase vs Firefox

#9 2008-03-15 11:54:24

Re: /usr/local/bin vs /usr/bin and Kazehakase vs Firefox

#10 2008-03-15 11:57:15

Re: /usr/local/bin vs /usr/bin and Kazehakase vs Firefox

#11 2008-03-15 17:22:44

Re: /usr/local/bin vs /usr/bin and Kazehakase vs Firefox

#12 2008-03-16 00:48:39

Re: /usr/local/bin vs /usr/bin and Kazehakase vs Firefox

#13 2008-03-16 06:50:18

Re: /usr/local/bin vs /usr/bin and Kazehakase vs Firefox

#14 2008-03-16 08:38:52

Re: /usr/local/bin vs /usr/bin and Kazehakase vs Firefox

#15 2008-03-16 11:30:19

Re: /usr/local/bin vs /usr/bin and Kazehakase vs Firefox

Board footer