• cm0002@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Is there a historical reason?

      If you’re asking that in anything Linux related, it’s probably a Yes 99% of the time LMAO

    • Random Dent@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      2 months ago

      According to this, it’s been around since the 70’s and was originally just a catch-all for files that didn’t fit in the other default directories, but over time has come to be mostly used for config files. I assume it would cause utter mayhem to try and change the name now so I guess it just sticks. Someone suggested “Edit To Configure” as a backronym to try and make it make more sense if that helps anyone lol.

    • pixelblut@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      Deutsch
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Try naming a folder “CON” in Windows and learn the magic of old spaghetti code by a multi billion dollar company.

    • Revan343@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s probably the standard in both POSIX and the Single UNIX Specification, so I guess ask Ken Thompson?