Could you try being more condescending? I can't tell if you actually work in tech yet.
We can know how and why '/usr/local/bin' came into being while still disagreeing that it makes any sense to keep using that today.
We know why '/sbin' and '/usr/bin' exist separately from '/bin', yet the distinction is completely useless today and so many systems just symlink it all together!
It is not unreasonable to suggest that just because we keep doing things a certain way means that doing it that way is the right way to do it.
It is not hard to critique. The hard part is finding how to change while moving existing ecosystem and preserving all the use cases people depend on.
I expect there is a reason Arch Linux symlinks to /usr/bin and not to /bin:
$ ls -l /
bin -> usr/bin
lib -> usr/lib
lib64 -> usr/lib
sbin -> usr/bin
$PATH is configurable and allows several directories. One needs something like Plan 9 namespaces and union mount to replicate, for example, rbenv:
; cd foo
; bind -a /ruby2.6/lib /lib
; bind -a /ruby2.6/bin /bin
Real world analogy: we are not perfect as species, but let's spend our time where and how we can improve instead of speaking of "garbage" in our DNA and how it would be great without it.
Please don't feed trolls. The comment you're responding to in particular should have been downvoted (or flagged) and then left alone. Engaging accomplishes nothing except to waste your time, squander the attention of other readers, and makes it hard to resist throwing in swipes like "try being more condescending".
