After accidentally renaming /usr, how do I rename it back? The Next CEO of Stack OverflowWhat happens when you delete a hard link?unix - accidentally moved everything under root to /old - Solaris 10How to use QEMU without desktopusing sudo on GUI applicationsUsing Atlas from scipyUse shared libraries in /usr/local/libWhy when loading an SO file does it append a version to the end?Setting LD_LIBRARY_PATHHow to fix the Ubuntu Linux 15.10 Files GUI manager , Nautilus , flickers on and offlibglui.so.2: cannot open shared object fileHow to fix error: “symbol lookup error: /usr/local/lib/libQt5DBus.so.5: undefined symbol”?Reset gfortran / MPI installation on Ubuntu 16.04
What does "Its cash flow is deeply negative" mean?
Indicator light circuit
MessageLevel in QGIS3
Example of a Mathematician/Physicist whose Other Publications during their PhD eclipsed their PhD Thesis
Written every which way
Won the lottery - how do I keep the money?
I believe this to be a fraud - hired, then asked to cash check and send cash as Bitcoin
To not tell, not take, and not want
Why am I allowed to create multiple unique pointers from a single object?
Preparing Indesign booklet with .psd graphics for print
Can we say or write : "No, it'sn't"?
How to prevent changing the value of variable?
How long to clear the 'suck zone' of a turbofan after start is initiated?
Grabbing quick drinks
Why has the US not been more assertive in confronting Russia in recent years?
Can I equip Skullclamp on a creature I am sacrificing?
How to invert MapIndexed on a ragged structure? How to construct a tree from rules?
How do I make a variable always equal to the result of some calculations?
Is 'diverse range' a pleonastic phrase?
What can we do to stop prior company from asking us questions?
Why does the UK parliament need a vote on the political declaration?
Is micro rebar a better way to reinforce concrete than rebar?
Complex fractions
Why didn't Khan get resurrected in the Genesis Explosion?
After accidentally renaming /usr, how do I rename it back?
The Next CEO of Stack OverflowWhat happens when you delete a hard link?unix - accidentally moved everything under root to /old - Solaris 10How to use QEMU without desktopusing sudo on GUI applicationsUsing Atlas from scipyUse shared libraries in /usr/local/libWhy when loading an SO file does it append a version to the end?Setting LD_LIBRARY_PATHHow to fix the Ubuntu Linux 15.10 Files GUI manager , Nautilus , flickers on and offlibglui.so.2: cannot open shared object fileHow to fix error: “symbol lookup error: /usr/local/lib/libQt5DBus.so.5: undefined symbol”?Reset gfortran / MPI installation on Ubuntu 16.04
I accidentally renamed the directory /usr into /usr_bak.
I want to change it back, so I append the path /usr_bak/bin to $PATH to allow the system to find the command sudo.
But now sudo mv /usr_bak /usr gives me the error:
sudo: error while loading shared libraries: libsudo_util.so.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
Is there a way to rename the /usr_bak as /usr besides reinstalling the system?
ubuntu sudo mv
edited Mar 19 '18 at 23:58
Jeff Schaller♦
44.3k1162143
asked Mar 19 '18 at 3:17
YvesYves
934923
|
show 11 more comments
I accidentally renamed the directory /usr into /usr_bak.
I want to change it back, so I append the path /usr_bak/bin to $PATH to allow the system to find the command sudo.
But now sudo mv /usr_bak /usr gives me the error:
sudo: error while loading shared libraries: libsudo_util.so.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
Is there a way to rename the /usr_bak as /usr besides reinstalling the system?
ubuntu sudo mv
edited Mar 19 '18 at 23:58
Jeff Schaller♦
44.3k1162143
asked Mar 19 '18 at 3:17
YvesYves
934923
2
Which OS is this? I wonder howsudoeven got to library stage, it's usually in/usr/bin/and should have failed with a command-not-found error. Also, do you have a root password set?
– muru
Mar 19 '18 at 3:24
3
@muru It's Ubuntu. You are right, I did get the error aboutnot foundbefore so I appended the new path/usr_bak/binto$PATHand now I get the error in my post here...
– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 3:27
2
@user1717828 it's complicated. I have to compile a project, developed on Ubuntu 16.04, on Ubuntu 17.10. So I'm thinking if I can simply copy the/usrof Ubuntu 16.04 to overwrite the/usrof Ubuntu 17.10...
– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 17:55
6
Have you considered using a VM to compile the project instead of such drastic changes?
– Kevin
Mar 19 '18 at 23:50
3
You can run virtualbox in headless mode. It may be easiest to set up a guest on another machine, or get a pre-configured one.
– Kevin
Mar 20 '18 at 1:47
|
show 11 more comments
I accidentally renamed the directory /usr into /usr_bak.
I want to change it back, so I append the path /usr_bak/bin to $PATH to allow the system to find the command sudo.
But now sudo mv /usr_bak /usr gives me the error:
sudo: error while loading shared libraries: libsudo_util.so.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
Is there a way to rename the /usr_bak as /usr besides reinstalling the system?
ubuntu sudo mv
edited Mar 19 '18 at 23:58
Jeff Schaller♦
44.3k1162143
asked Mar 19 '18 at 3:17
YvesYves
934923
I accidentally renamed the directory /usr into /usr_bak.
I want to change it back, so I append the path /usr_bak/bin to $PATH to allow the system to find the command sudo.
But now sudo mv /usr_bak /usr gives me the error:
sudo: error while loading shared libraries: libsudo_util.so.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
Is there a way to rename the /usr_bak as /usr besides reinstalling the system?
ubuntu sudo mv
ubuntu sudo mv
edited Mar 19 '18 at 23:58
Jeff Schaller♦
44.3k1162143
asked Mar 19 '18 at 3:17
YvesYves
934923
edited Mar 19 '18 at 23:58
Jeff Schaller♦
44.3k1162143
asked Mar 19 '18 at 3:17
YvesYves
934923
edited Mar 19 '18 at 23:58
Jeff Schaller♦
44.3k1162143
edited Mar 19 '18 at 23:58
Jeff Schaller♦
44.3k1162143
edited Mar 19 '18 at 23:58
Jeff Schaller♦
44.3k1162143
44.3k1162143
asked Mar 19 '18 at 3:17
YvesYves
934923
asked Mar 19 '18 at 3:17
YvesYves
934923
asked Mar 19 '18 at 3:17
YvesYves
934923
934923
2
Which OS is this? I wonder howsudoeven got to library stage, it's usually in/usr/bin/and should have failed with a command-not-found error. Also, do you have a root password set?
– muru
Mar 19 '18 at 3:24
3
@muru It's Ubuntu. You are right, I did get the error aboutnot foundbefore so I appended the new path/usr_bak/binto$PATHand now I get the error in my post here...
– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 3:27
2
@user1717828 it's complicated. I have to compile a project, developed on Ubuntu 16.04, on Ubuntu 17.10. So I'm thinking if I can simply copy the/usrof Ubuntu 16.04 to overwrite the/usrof Ubuntu 17.10...
– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 17:55
6
Have you considered using a VM to compile the project instead of such drastic changes?
– Kevin
Mar 19 '18 at 23:50
3
You can run virtualbox in headless mode. It may be easiest to set up a guest on another machine, or get a pre-configured one.
– Kevin
Mar 20 '18 at 1:47
|
show 11 more comments
2
Which OS is this? I wonder howsudoeven got to library stage, it's usually in/usr/bin/and should have failed with a command-not-found error. Also, do you have a root password set?
– muru
Mar 19 '18 at 3:24
3
@muru It's Ubuntu. You are right, I did get the error aboutnot foundbefore so I appended the new path/usr_bak/binto$PATHand now I get the error in my post here...
– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 3:27
2
@user1717828 it's complicated. I have to compile a project, developed on Ubuntu 16.04, on Ubuntu 17.10. So I'm thinking if I can simply copy the/usrof Ubuntu 16.04 to overwrite the/usrof Ubuntu 17.10...
– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 17:55
6
Have you considered using a VM to compile the project instead of such drastic changes?
– Kevin
Mar 19 '18 at 23:50
3
You can run virtualbox in headless mode. It may be easiest to set up a guest on another machine, or get a pre-configured one.
– Kevin
Mar 20 '18 at 1:47
2
2
Which OS is this? I wonder how
sudo even got to library stage, it's usually in /usr/bin/ and should have failed with a command-not-found error. Also, do you have a root password set?– muru
Mar 19 '18 at 3:24
Which OS is this? I wonder how
sudo even got to library stage, it's usually in /usr/bin/ and should have failed with a command-not-found error. Also, do you have a root password set?– muru
Mar 19 '18 at 3:24
3
3
@muru It's Ubuntu. You are right, I did get the error about
not found before so I appended the new path /usr_bak/bin to $PATH and now I get the error in my post here...– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 3:27
@muru It's Ubuntu. You are right, I did get the error about
not found before so I appended the new path /usr_bak/bin to $PATH and now I get the error in my post here...– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 3:27
2
2
@user1717828 it's complicated. I have to compile a project, developed on Ubuntu 16.04, on Ubuntu 17.10. So I'm thinking if I can simply copy the
/usr of Ubuntu 16.04 to overwrite the /usr of Ubuntu 17.10...– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 17:55
@user1717828 it's complicated. I have to compile a project, developed on Ubuntu 16.04, on Ubuntu 17.10. So I'm thinking if I can simply copy the
/usr of Ubuntu 16.04 to overwrite the /usr of Ubuntu 17.10...– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 17:55
6
6
Have you considered using a VM to compile the project instead of such drastic changes?
– Kevin
Mar 19 '18 at 23:50
Have you considered using a VM to compile the project instead of such drastic changes?
– Kevin
Mar 19 '18 at 23:50
3
3
You can run virtualbox in headless mode. It may be easiest to set up a guest on another machine, or get a pre-configured one.
– Kevin
Mar 20 '18 at 1:47
You can run virtualbox in headless mode. It may be easiest to set up a guest on another machine, or get a pre-configured one.
– Kevin
Mar 20 '18 at 1:47
|
show 11 more comments
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
Since you have set a password for root, use su and busybox, installed by default in Ubuntu. All of su's required libraries are in /lib. Busybox is a collection of utilities that's statically linked, so missing libraries shouldn't be a problem. Do:
su -c '/bin/busybox mv /usr_bak /usr'
(While Busybox itself also has a su applet, the /bin/busybox binary is not setuid and so doesn't work unless ran as root.)
If you don't have a root password, you could probably use Gilles' solution here using (Gilles says this won't work with setuid binaries like sudo) reboot and edit the GRUB menu to boot with LD_LIBRARY_PATH, orinit=/bin/busybox as a kernel parameter and move the folder back.
answered Mar 19 '18 at 3:35
murumuru
36.7k589163
71
Now, don't accidentally rename/lib.
– sleblanc
Mar 19 '18 at 12:40
2
@sleblanc lol... Seriously, what if I accidentally rename/lib? Can I use the same method to repair it?
– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 18:00
2
If your/libis a symlink to/usr/lib, it get's more interesting :)LD_LIBRARY_PATH&PATHto save the day. [or busybox should still work too]
– Mark K Cowan
Mar 19 '18 at 20:14
5
LD_LIBRARY_PATHwouldn't help to run sudo sincesudois setuid. If its libraries aren't in the right place, sudo won't work until root repairs it.
– Gilles
Mar 19 '18 at 21:43
8
@Yves if you renamed/lib, then you'd probably have to reboot toinit=/bin/busybox
– muru
Mar 19 '18 at 23:54
|
show 4 more comments
In addition to muru's answer:
you could have used some rescue boot USB key to repair your system; e.g. if your system is some Debian or Ubuntu, boot the installation USB key in rescue mode, and do the appropriate
mountandmvandumount.to be able to repair more easily such mistakes, I generally also install a static shell with several builtin commands (notably with some
cp,rm,mv-like builtins) such assash(it is packaged in Debian & Ubuntu, and also available as sash-3.8.tar.gz in source form) and boot withinit=/bin/sashpassed to Grub.
PS: sash is slightly buggy, and not entirely Posix compliant, but still very useful.
answered Mar 19 '18 at 11:27
Basile StarynkevitchBasile Starynkevitch
8,1412041
Could you please explain how to install a static shell with several builtin commands? Is there some manual?
– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 17:59
1
On Debian or Ubuntu:apt-get install sash. But you could also download sash-3.8.tar.gz and compile it.
– Basile Starynkevitch
Mar 19 '18 at 18:00
I keep a liveiso on the hdd with a custom grub entry for problems like this. No need to get complicated, just boot a live os and manipulate files freely :)
– FreeSoftwareServers
Mar 22 '18 at 8:44
add a comment |
I think the best safest way is to reboot using a USB, CD or DVD booted OS (Debian, Ubuntu, Suse, etc). Then mount the drive containing the problems and do the rename.
Safer than booting into a minefield with /usr or /lib effectively missing.
answered Mar 21 '18 at 4:16
LarryLarry
211
1
You can boot an ISO directly from Grub/HDD no need for USB/DVD etc. Pretty nifty trick grub has call loopback.
– FreeSoftwareServers
Mar 22 '18 at 8:47
add a comment |
I ran into a similar problem where I renamed /usr/bin to /usr/bin_bkp for some test and then I wasn't able to rename (as the command didn't find the sudo in the standard directory which is /usr/bin) and then I went to the /usr/bin_bkp directory manually (using File manager) and most of the functions (including the rename) on the right click are disabled.
Then I tried the following command and it fixed the issue
$/usr/bin_bkp/sudo mv /usr/bin_bkp/ /usr/bin/
I invoked the sudo from the current path and it worked, now everything's back to normal. Hope this helps someone like me.
OS: Xubuntu 14.04
edited Jan 22 at 3:19
user1794469
1,6421923
answered Jan 22 at 0:09
geekgeek
11
add a comment |
I can't try this right now (and am not sure I'd want to), but it seems like it ought to work to create yourself a new "/usr" as a hard link (not a soft link) to your "/usr_bak, then delete the "/usr_bak"
ln /usr_bak /usr
rm /usr_bak
The hard link created by "ln" (with no "-s" argument) in the file system should make both the usr and usr_bak directories equally valid links to the directories in question. "rm" just removes the one link you asked it to remove, not both of them. Since there's still a valid link to the contents, they should remain accessible through the remaining link at "/usr".
answered Mar 20 '18 at 20:08
T.E.D.T.E.D.
26515
I suppose if the "rm" scares you, you could just skip it and leave the "/usr_bak" link there too. Its the "ln" command that gets you your "/usr" directory link back.
– T.E.D.
Mar 20 '18 at 20:11
4
I was under the impression that Linux (or at least Ubuntu) does not allow hard links to directories. E.g., askubuntu.com/questions/210741/…
– Chris Bouchard
Mar 20 '18 at 21:03
3
@Chris: Right, Linux does not allow directory hardlinks (other than.and.., so the link count on a directory tells you the number of first-level subdirs). Also,rmdoesn't work on directories, you'd have to usermdir. (lnandrmwork on symlinks to directories, but we're talking about an actual directory). Also, this doesn't solve the problem, because it requiresrootjust likemv, because of the permissions on/. If you could run this, you could runmvinstead like a normal person.
– Peter Cordes
Mar 20 '18 at 22:59
2
Hardlinks to directories are not supported on most (all?) Unices because it's too difficult for software doing a recursive file system crawl to detect infinite loops. It's possible if the software keeps track of all inodes visited and it's crawling an inode aware filesystem (i.e. not FAT32/NTFS), but checking for symbolic links and not traversing them is much easier. All that's needed is a quick call to lstat(2) to check file type.
– penguin359
Mar 21 '18 at 5:29
1
@Pryftan, myln(1)on Debian says this for the the-d/-F/--directoryoption: "allow the superuser to attempt to hard link directories (note: will probably fail due to system restrictions, even for the superuser)". So you're free to try, but your filesystem probably won't let you.
– Toby Speight
Mar 21 '18 at 10:35
|
show 6 more comments
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f432002%2fafter-accidentally-renaming-usr-how-do-i-rename-it-back%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Since you have set a password for root, use su and busybox, installed by default in Ubuntu. All of su's required libraries are in /lib. Busybox is a collection of utilities that's statically linked, so missing libraries shouldn't be a problem. Do:
su -c '/bin/busybox mv /usr_bak /usr'
(While Busybox itself also has a su applet, the /bin/busybox binary is not setuid and so doesn't work unless ran as root.)
If you don't have a root password, you could probably use Gilles' solution here using (Gilles says this won't work with setuid binaries like sudo) reboot and edit the GRUB menu to boot with LD_LIBRARY_PATH, orinit=/bin/busybox as a kernel parameter and move the folder back.
answered Mar 19 '18 at 3:35
murumuru
36.7k589163
71
Now, don't accidentally rename/lib.
– sleblanc
Mar 19 '18 at 12:40
2
@sleblanc lol... Seriously, what if I accidentally rename/lib? Can I use the same method to repair it?
– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 18:00
2
If your/libis a symlink to/usr/lib, it get's more interesting :)LD_LIBRARY_PATH&PATHto save the day. [or busybox should still work too]
– Mark K Cowan
Mar 19 '18 at 20:14
5
LD_LIBRARY_PATHwouldn't help to run sudo sincesudois setuid. If its libraries aren't in the right place, sudo won't work until root repairs it.
– Gilles
Mar 19 '18 at 21:43
8
@Yves if you renamed/lib, then you'd probably have to reboot toinit=/bin/busybox
– muru
Mar 19 '18 at 23:54
|
show 4 more comments
Since you have set a password for root, use su and busybox, installed by default in Ubuntu. All of su's required libraries are in /lib. Busybox is a collection of utilities that's statically linked, so missing libraries shouldn't be a problem. Do:
su -c '/bin/busybox mv /usr_bak /usr'
(While Busybox itself also has a su applet, the /bin/busybox binary is not setuid and so doesn't work unless ran as root.)
If you don't have a root password, you could probably use Gilles' solution here using (Gilles says this won't work with setuid binaries like sudo) reboot and edit the GRUB menu to boot with LD_LIBRARY_PATH, orinit=/bin/busybox as a kernel parameter and move the folder back.
answered Mar 19 '18 at 3:35
murumuru
36.7k589163
71
Now, don't accidentally rename/lib.
– sleblanc
Mar 19 '18 at 12:40
2
@sleblanc lol... Seriously, what if I accidentally rename/lib? Can I use the same method to repair it?
– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 18:00
2
If your/libis a symlink to/usr/lib, it get's more interesting :)LD_LIBRARY_PATH&PATHto save the day. [or busybox should still work too]
– Mark K Cowan
Mar 19 '18 at 20:14
5
LD_LIBRARY_PATHwouldn't help to run sudo sincesudois setuid. If its libraries aren't in the right place, sudo won't work until root repairs it.
– Gilles
Mar 19 '18 at 21:43
8
@Yves if you renamed/lib, then you'd probably have to reboot toinit=/bin/busybox
– muru
Mar 19 '18 at 23:54
|
show 4 more comments
Since you have set a password for root, use su and busybox, installed by default in Ubuntu. All of su's required libraries are in /lib. Busybox is a collection of utilities that's statically linked, so missing libraries shouldn't be a problem. Do:
su -c '/bin/busybox mv /usr_bak /usr'
(While Busybox itself also has a su applet, the /bin/busybox binary is not setuid and so doesn't work unless ran as root.)
If you don't have a root password, you could probably use Gilles' solution here using (Gilles says this won't work with setuid binaries like sudo) reboot and edit the GRUB menu to boot with LD_LIBRARY_PATH, orinit=/bin/busybox as a kernel parameter and move the folder back.
answered Mar 19 '18 at 3:35
murumuru
36.7k589163
Since you have set a password for root, use su and busybox, installed by default in Ubuntu. All of su's required libraries are in /lib. Busybox is a collection of utilities that's statically linked, so missing libraries shouldn't be a problem. Do:
su -c '/bin/busybox mv /usr_bak /usr'
(While Busybox itself also has a su applet, the /bin/busybox binary is not setuid and so doesn't work unless ran as root.)
If you don't have a root password, you could probably use Gilles' solution here using (Gilles says this won't work with setuid binaries like sudo) reboot and edit the GRUB menu to boot with LD_LIBRARY_PATH, orinit=/bin/busybox as a kernel parameter and move the folder back.
answered Mar 19 '18 at 3:35
murumuru
36.7k589163
edited Mar 21 '18 at 5:43
answered Mar 19 '18 at 3:35
murumuru
36.7k589163
answered Mar 19 '18 at 3:35
murumuru
36.7k589163
answered Mar 19 '18 at 3:35
murumuru
36.7k589163
36.7k589163
71
Now, don't accidentally rename/lib.
– sleblanc
Mar 19 '18 at 12:40
2
@sleblanc lol... Seriously, what if I accidentally rename/lib? Can I use the same method to repair it?
– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 18:00
2
If your/libis a symlink to/usr/lib, it get's more interesting :)LD_LIBRARY_PATH&PATHto save the day. [or busybox should still work too]
– Mark K Cowan
Mar 19 '18 at 20:14
5
LD_LIBRARY_PATHwouldn't help to run sudo sincesudois setuid. If its libraries aren't in the right place, sudo won't work until root repairs it.
– Gilles
Mar 19 '18 at 21:43
8
@Yves if you renamed/lib, then you'd probably have to reboot toinit=/bin/busybox
– muru
Mar 19 '18 at 23:54
|
show 4 more comments
71
Now, don't accidentally rename/lib.
– sleblanc
Mar 19 '18 at 12:40
2
@sleblanc lol... Seriously, what if I accidentally rename/lib? Can I use the same method to repair it?
– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 18:00
2
If your/libis a symlink to/usr/lib, it get's more interesting :)LD_LIBRARY_PATH&PATHto save the day. [or busybox should still work too]
– Mark K Cowan
Mar 19 '18 at 20:14
5
LD_LIBRARY_PATHwouldn't help to run sudo sincesudois setuid. If its libraries aren't in the right place, sudo won't work until root repairs it.
– Gilles
Mar 19 '18 at 21:43
8
@Yves if you renamed/lib, then you'd probably have to reboot toinit=/bin/busybox
– muru
Mar 19 '18 at 23:54
71
71
Now, don't accidentally rename
/lib.– sleblanc
Mar 19 '18 at 12:40
Now, don't accidentally rename
/lib.– sleblanc
Mar 19 '18 at 12:40
2
2
@sleblanc lol... Seriously, what if I accidentally rename
/lib? Can I use the same method to repair it?– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 18:00
@sleblanc lol... Seriously, what if I accidentally rename
/lib? Can I use the same method to repair it?– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 18:00
2
2
If your
/lib is a symlink to /usr/lib, it get's more interesting :) LD_LIBRARY_PATH & PATH to save the day. [or busybox should still work too]– Mark K Cowan
Mar 19 '18 at 20:14
If your
/lib is a symlink to /usr/lib, it get's more interesting :) LD_LIBRARY_PATH & PATH to save the day. [or busybox should still work too]– Mark K Cowan
Mar 19 '18 at 20:14
5
5
LD_LIBRARY_PATH wouldn't help to run sudo since sudo is setuid. If its libraries aren't in the right place, sudo won't work until root repairs it.– Gilles
Mar 19 '18 at 21:43
LD_LIBRARY_PATH wouldn't help to run sudo since sudo is setuid. If its libraries aren't in the right place, sudo won't work until root repairs it.– Gilles
Mar 19 '18 at 21:43
8
8
@Yves if you renamed
/lib, then you'd probably have to reboot to init=/bin/busybox– muru
Mar 19 '18 at 23:54
@Yves if you renamed
/lib, then you'd probably have to reboot to init=/bin/busybox– muru
Mar 19 '18 at 23:54
|
show 4 more comments
In addition to muru's answer:
you could have used some rescue boot USB key to repair your system; e.g. if your system is some Debian or Ubuntu, boot the installation USB key in rescue mode, and do the appropriate
mountandmvandumount.to be able to repair more easily such mistakes, I generally also install a static shell with several builtin commands (notably with some
cp,rm,mv-like builtins) such assash(it is packaged in Debian & Ubuntu, and also available as sash-3.8.tar.gz in source form) and boot withinit=/bin/sashpassed to Grub.
PS: sash is slightly buggy, and not entirely Posix compliant, but still very useful.
answered Mar 19 '18 at 11:27
Basile StarynkevitchBasile Starynkevitch
8,1412041
Could you please explain how to install a static shell with several builtin commands? Is there some manual?
– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 17:59
1
On Debian or Ubuntu:apt-get install sash. But you could also download sash-3.8.tar.gz and compile it.
– Basile Starynkevitch
Mar 19 '18 at 18:00
I keep a liveiso on the hdd with a custom grub entry for problems like this. No need to get complicated, just boot a live os and manipulate files freely :)
– FreeSoftwareServers
Mar 22 '18 at 8:44
add a comment |
In addition to muru's answer:
you could have used some rescue boot USB key to repair your system; e.g. if your system is some Debian or Ubuntu, boot the installation USB key in rescue mode, and do the appropriate
mountandmvandumount.to be able to repair more easily such mistakes, I generally also install a static shell with several builtin commands (notably with some
cp,rm,mv-like builtins) such assash(it is packaged in Debian & Ubuntu, and also available as sash-3.8.tar.gz in source form) and boot withinit=/bin/sashpassed to Grub.
PS: sash is slightly buggy, and not entirely Posix compliant, but still very useful.
answered Mar 19 '18 at 11:27
Basile StarynkevitchBasile Starynkevitch
8,1412041
Could you please explain how to install a static shell with several builtin commands? Is there some manual?
– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 17:59
1
On Debian or Ubuntu:apt-get install sash. But you could also download sash-3.8.tar.gz and compile it.
– Basile Starynkevitch
Mar 19 '18 at 18:00
I keep a liveiso on the hdd with a custom grub entry for problems like this. No need to get complicated, just boot a live os and manipulate files freely :)
– FreeSoftwareServers
Mar 22 '18 at 8:44
add a comment |
In addition to muru's answer:
you could have used some rescue boot USB key to repair your system; e.g. if your system is some Debian or Ubuntu, boot the installation USB key in rescue mode, and do the appropriate
mountandmvandumount.to be able to repair more easily such mistakes, I generally also install a static shell with several builtin commands (notably with some
cp,rm,mv-like builtins) such assash(it is packaged in Debian & Ubuntu, and also available as sash-3.8.tar.gz in source form) and boot withinit=/bin/sashpassed to Grub.
PS: sash is slightly buggy, and not entirely Posix compliant, but still very useful.
answered Mar 19 '18 at 11:27
Basile StarynkevitchBasile Starynkevitch
8,1412041
In addition to muru's answer:
you could have used some rescue boot USB key to repair your system; e.g. if your system is some Debian or Ubuntu, boot the installation USB key in rescue mode, and do the appropriate
mountandmvandumount.to be able to repair more easily such mistakes, I generally also install a static shell with several builtin commands (notably with some
cp,rm,mv-like builtins) such assash(it is packaged in Debian & Ubuntu, and also available as sash-3.8.tar.gz in source form) and boot withinit=/bin/sashpassed to Grub.
PS: sash is slightly buggy, and not entirely Posix compliant, but still very useful.
answered Mar 19 '18 at 11:27
Basile StarynkevitchBasile Starynkevitch
8,1412041
edited Mar 19 '18 at 18:02
answered Mar 19 '18 at 11:27
Basile StarynkevitchBasile Starynkevitch
8,1412041
answered Mar 19 '18 at 11:27
Basile StarynkevitchBasile Starynkevitch
8,1412041
answered Mar 19 '18 at 11:27
Basile StarynkevitchBasile Starynkevitch
8,1412041
8,1412041
Could you please explain how to install a static shell with several builtin commands? Is there some manual?
– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 17:59
1
On Debian or Ubuntu:apt-get install sash. But you could also download sash-3.8.tar.gz and compile it.
– Basile Starynkevitch
Mar 19 '18 at 18:00
I keep a liveiso on the hdd with a custom grub entry for problems like this. No need to get complicated, just boot a live os and manipulate files freely :)
– FreeSoftwareServers
Mar 22 '18 at 8:44
add a comment |
Could you please explain how to install a static shell with several builtin commands? Is there some manual?
– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 17:59
1
On Debian or Ubuntu:apt-get install sash. But you could also download sash-3.8.tar.gz and compile it.
– Basile Starynkevitch
Mar 19 '18 at 18:00
I keep a liveiso on the hdd with a custom grub entry for problems like this. No need to get complicated, just boot a live os and manipulate files freely :)
– FreeSoftwareServers
Mar 22 '18 at 8:44
Could you please explain how to install a static shell with several builtin commands? Is there some manual?
– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 17:59
Could you please explain how to install a static shell with several builtin commands? Is there some manual?
– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 17:59
1
1
On Debian or Ubuntu:
apt-get install sash. But you could also download sash-3.8.tar.gz and compile it.– Basile Starynkevitch
Mar 19 '18 at 18:00
On Debian or Ubuntu:
apt-get install sash. But you could also download sash-3.8.tar.gz and compile it.– Basile Starynkevitch
Mar 19 '18 at 18:00
I keep a liveiso on the hdd with a custom grub entry for problems like this. No need to get complicated, just boot a live os and manipulate files freely :)
– FreeSoftwareServers
Mar 22 '18 at 8:44
I keep a liveiso on the hdd with a custom grub entry for problems like this. No need to get complicated, just boot a live os and manipulate files freely :)
– FreeSoftwareServers
Mar 22 '18 at 8:44
add a comment |
I think the best safest way is to reboot using a USB, CD or DVD booted OS (Debian, Ubuntu, Suse, etc). Then mount the drive containing the problems and do the rename.
Safer than booting into a minefield with /usr or /lib effectively missing.
answered Mar 21 '18 at 4:16
LarryLarry
211
1
You can boot an ISO directly from Grub/HDD no need for USB/DVD etc. Pretty nifty trick grub has call loopback.
– FreeSoftwareServers
Mar 22 '18 at 8:47
add a comment |
I think the best safest way is to reboot using a USB, CD or DVD booted OS (Debian, Ubuntu, Suse, etc). Then mount the drive containing the problems and do the rename.
Safer than booting into a minefield with /usr or /lib effectively missing.
answered Mar 21 '18 at 4:16
LarryLarry
211
1
You can boot an ISO directly from Grub/HDD no need for USB/DVD etc. Pretty nifty trick grub has call loopback.
– FreeSoftwareServers
Mar 22 '18 at 8:47
add a comment |
I think the best safest way is to reboot using a USB, CD or DVD booted OS (Debian, Ubuntu, Suse, etc). Then mount the drive containing the problems and do the rename.
Safer than booting into a minefield with /usr or /lib effectively missing.
answered Mar 21 '18 at 4:16
LarryLarry
211
I think the best safest way is to reboot using a USB, CD or DVD booted OS (Debian, Ubuntu, Suse, etc). Then mount the drive containing the problems and do the rename.
Safer than booting into a minefield with /usr or /lib effectively missing.
answered Mar 21 '18 at 4:16
LarryLarry
211
answered Mar 21 '18 at 4:16
LarryLarry
211
answered Mar 21 '18 at 4:16
LarryLarry
211
answered Mar 21 '18 at 4:16
LarryLarry
211
211
1
You can boot an ISO directly from Grub/HDD no need for USB/DVD etc. Pretty nifty trick grub has call loopback.
– FreeSoftwareServers
Mar 22 '18 at 8:47
add a comment |
1
You can boot an ISO directly from Grub/HDD no need for USB/DVD etc. Pretty nifty trick grub has call loopback.
– FreeSoftwareServers
Mar 22 '18 at 8:47
1
1
You can boot an ISO directly from Grub/HDD no need for USB/DVD etc. Pretty nifty trick grub has call loopback.
– FreeSoftwareServers
Mar 22 '18 at 8:47
You can boot an ISO directly from Grub/HDD no need for USB/DVD etc. Pretty nifty trick grub has call loopback.
– FreeSoftwareServers
Mar 22 '18 at 8:47
add a comment |
I ran into a similar problem where I renamed /usr/bin to /usr/bin_bkp for some test and then I wasn't able to rename (as the command didn't find the sudo in the standard directory which is /usr/bin) and then I went to the /usr/bin_bkp directory manually (using File manager) and most of the functions (including the rename) on the right click are disabled.
Then I tried the following command and it fixed the issue
$/usr/bin_bkp/sudo mv /usr/bin_bkp/ /usr/bin/
I invoked the sudo from the current path and it worked, now everything's back to normal. Hope this helps someone like me.
OS: Xubuntu 14.04
edited Jan 22 at 3:19
user1794469
1,6421923
answered Jan 22 at 0:09
geekgeek
11
add a comment |
I ran into a similar problem where I renamed /usr/bin to /usr/bin_bkp for some test and then I wasn't able to rename (as the command didn't find the sudo in the standard directory which is /usr/bin) and then I went to the /usr/bin_bkp directory manually (using File manager) and most of the functions (including the rename) on the right click are disabled.
Then I tried the following command and it fixed the issue
$/usr/bin_bkp/sudo mv /usr/bin_bkp/ /usr/bin/
I invoked the sudo from the current path and it worked, now everything's back to normal. Hope this helps someone like me.
OS: Xubuntu 14.04
edited Jan 22 at 3:19
user1794469
1,6421923
answered Jan 22 at 0:09
geekgeek
11
add a comment |
I ran into a similar problem where I renamed /usr/bin to /usr/bin_bkp for some test and then I wasn't able to rename (as the command didn't find the sudo in the standard directory which is /usr/bin) and then I went to the /usr/bin_bkp directory manually (using File manager) and most of the functions (including the rename) on the right click are disabled.
Then I tried the following command and it fixed the issue
$/usr/bin_bkp/sudo mv /usr/bin_bkp/ /usr/bin/
I invoked the sudo from the current path and it worked, now everything's back to normal. Hope this helps someone like me.
OS: Xubuntu 14.04
edited Jan 22 at 3:19
user1794469
1,6421923
answered Jan 22 at 0:09
geekgeek
11
I ran into a similar problem where I renamed /usr/bin to /usr/bin_bkp for some test and then I wasn't able to rename (as the command didn't find the sudo in the standard directory which is /usr/bin) and then I went to the /usr/bin_bkp directory manually (using File manager) and most of the functions (including the rename) on the right click are disabled.
Then I tried the following command and it fixed the issue
$/usr/bin_bkp/sudo mv /usr/bin_bkp/ /usr/bin/
I invoked the sudo from the current path and it worked, now everything's back to normal. Hope this helps someone like me.
OS: Xubuntu 14.04
edited Jan 22 at 3:19
user1794469
1,6421923
answered Jan 22 at 0:09
geekgeek
11
edited Jan 22 at 3:19
user1794469
1,6421923
edited Jan 22 at 3:19
user1794469
1,6421923
edited Jan 22 at 3:19
user1794469
1,6421923
1,6421923
answered Jan 22 at 0:09
geekgeek
11
answered Jan 22 at 0:09
geekgeek
11
answered Jan 22 at 0:09
geekgeek
11
11
add a comment |
add a comment |
I can't try this right now (and am not sure I'd want to), but it seems like it ought to work to create yourself a new "/usr" as a hard link (not a soft link) to your "/usr_bak, then delete the "/usr_bak"
ln /usr_bak /usr
rm /usr_bak
The hard link created by "ln" (with no "-s" argument) in the file system should make both the usr and usr_bak directories equally valid links to the directories in question. "rm" just removes the one link you asked it to remove, not both of them. Since there's still a valid link to the contents, they should remain accessible through the remaining link at "/usr".
answered Mar 20 '18 at 20:08
T.E.D.T.E.D.
26515
I suppose if the "rm" scares you, you could just skip it and leave the "/usr_bak" link there too. Its the "ln" command that gets you your "/usr" directory link back.
– T.E.D.
Mar 20 '18 at 20:11
4
I was under the impression that Linux (or at least Ubuntu) does not allow hard links to directories. E.g., askubuntu.com/questions/210741/…
– Chris Bouchard
Mar 20 '18 at 21:03
3
@Chris: Right, Linux does not allow directory hardlinks (other than.and.., so the link count on a directory tells you the number of first-level subdirs). Also,rmdoesn't work on directories, you'd have to usermdir. (lnandrmwork on symlinks to directories, but we're talking about an actual directory). Also, this doesn't solve the problem, because it requiresrootjust likemv, because of the permissions on/. If you could run this, you could runmvinstead like a normal person.
– Peter Cordes
Mar 20 '18 at 22:59
2
Hardlinks to directories are not supported on most (all?) Unices because it's too difficult for software doing a recursive file system crawl to detect infinite loops. It's possible if the software keeps track of all inodes visited and it's crawling an inode aware filesystem (i.e. not FAT32/NTFS), but checking for symbolic links and not traversing them is much easier. All that's needed is a quick call to lstat(2) to check file type.
– penguin359
Mar 21 '18 at 5:29
1
@Pryftan, myln(1)on Debian says this for the the-d/-F/--directoryoption: "allow the superuser to attempt to hard link directories (note: will probably fail due to system restrictions, even for the superuser)". So you're free to try, but your filesystem probably won't let you.
– Toby Speight
Mar 21 '18 at 10:35
|
show 6 more comments
I can't try this right now (and am not sure I'd want to), but it seems like it ought to work to create yourself a new "/usr" as a hard link (not a soft link) to your "/usr_bak, then delete the "/usr_bak"
ln /usr_bak /usr
rm /usr_bak
The hard link created by "ln" (with no "-s" argument) in the file system should make both the usr and usr_bak directories equally valid links to the directories in question. "rm" just removes the one link you asked it to remove, not both of them. Since there's still a valid link to the contents, they should remain accessible through the remaining link at "/usr".
answered Mar 20 '18 at 20:08
T.E.D.T.E.D.
26515
I suppose if the "rm" scares you, you could just skip it and leave the "/usr_bak" link there too. Its the "ln" command that gets you your "/usr" directory link back.
– T.E.D.
Mar 20 '18 at 20:11
4
I was under the impression that Linux (or at least Ubuntu) does not allow hard links to directories. E.g., askubuntu.com/questions/210741/…
– Chris Bouchard
Mar 20 '18 at 21:03
3
@Chris: Right, Linux does not allow directory hardlinks (other than.and.., so the link count on a directory tells you the number of first-level subdirs). Also,rmdoesn't work on directories, you'd have to usermdir. (lnandrmwork on symlinks to directories, but we're talking about an actual directory). Also, this doesn't solve the problem, because it requiresrootjust likemv, because of the permissions on/. If you could run this, you could runmvinstead like a normal person.
– Peter Cordes
Mar 20 '18 at 22:59
2
Hardlinks to directories are not supported on most (all?) Unices because it's too difficult for software doing a recursive file system crawl to detect infinite loops. It's possible if the software keeps track of all inodes visited and it's crawling an inode aware filesystem (i.e. not FAT32/NTFS), but checking for symbolic links and not traversing them is much easier. All that's needed is a quick call to lstat(2) to check file type.
– penguin359
Mar 21 '18 at 5:29
1
@Pryftan, myln(1)on Debian says this for the the-d/-F/--directoryoption: "allow the superuser to attempt to hard link directories (note: will probably fail due to system restrictions, even for the superuser)". So you're free to try, but your filesystem probably won't let you.
– Toby Speight
Mar 21 '18 at 10:35
|
show 6 more comments
I can't try this right now (and am not sure I'd want to), but it seems like it ought to work to create yourself a new "/usr" as a hard link (not a soft link) to your "/usr_bak, then delete the "/usr_bak"
ln /usr_bak /usr
rm /usr_bak
The hard link created by "ln" (with no "-s" argument) in the file system should make both the usr and usr_bak directories equally valid links to the directories in question. "rm" just removes the one link you asked it to remove, not both of them. Since there's still a valid link to the contents, they should remain accessible through the remaining link at "/usr".
answered Mar 20 '18 at 20:08
T.E.D.T.E.D.
26515
I can't try this right now (and am not sure I'd want to), but it seems like it ought to work to create yourself a new "/usr" as a hard link (not a soft link) to your "/usr_bak, then delete the "/usr_bak"
ln /usr_bak /usr
rm /usr_bak
The hard link created by "ln" (with no "-s" argument) in the file system should make both the usr and usr_bak directories equally valid links to the directories in question. "rm" just removes the one link you asked it to remove, not both of them. Since there's still a valid link to the contents, they should remain accessible through the remaining link at "/usr".
answered Mar 20 '18 at 20:08
T.E.D.T.E.D.
26515
answered Mar 20 '18 at 20:08
T.E.D.T.E.D.
26515
answered Mar 20 '18 at 20:08
T.E.D.T.E.D.
26515
answered Mar 20 '18 at 20:08
T.E.D.T.E.D.
26515
26515
I suppose if the "rm" scares you, you could just skip it and leave the "/usr_bak" link there too. Its the "ln" command that gets you your "/usr" directory link back.
– T.E.D.
Mar 20 '18 at 20:11
4
I was under the impression that Linux (or at least Ubuntu) does not allow hard links to directories. E.g., askubuntu.com/questions/210741/…
– Chris Bouchard
Mar 20 '18 at 21:03
3
@Chris: Right, Linux does not allow directory hardlinks (other than.and.., so the link count on a directory tells you the number of first-level subdirs). Also,rmdoesn't work on directories, you'd have to usermdir. (lnandrmwork on symlinks to directories, but we're talking about an actual directory). Also, this doesn't solve the problem, because it requiresrootjust likemv, because of the permissions on/. If you could run this, you could runmvinstead like a normal person.
– Peter Cordes
Mar 20 '18 at 22:59
2
Hardlinks to directories are not supported on most (all?) Unices because it's too difficult for software doing a recursive file system crawl to detect infinite loops. It's possible if the software keeps track of all inodes visited and it's crawling an inode aware filesystem (i.e. not FAT32/NTFS), but checking for symbolic links and not traversing them is much easier. All that's needed is a quick call to lstat(2) to check file type.
– penguin359
Mar 21 '18 at 5:29
1
@Pryftan, myln(1)on Debian says this for the the-d/-F/--directoryoption: "allow the superuser to attempt to hard link directories (note: will probably fail due to system restrictions, even for the superuser)". So you're free to try, but your filesystem probably won't let you.
– Toby Speight
Mar 21 '18 at 10:35
|
show 6 more comments
I suppose if the "rm" scares you, you could just skip it and leave the "/usr_bak" link there too. Its the "ln" command that gets you your "/usr" directory link back.
– T.E.D.
Mar 20 '18 at 20:11
4
I was under the impression that Linux (or at least Ubuntu) does not allow hard links to directories. E.g., askubuntu.com/questions/210741/…
– Chris Bouchard
Mar 20 '18 at 21:03
3
@Chris: Right, Linux does not allow directory hardlinks (other than.and.., so the link count on a directory tells you the number of first-level subdirs). Also,rmdoesn't work on directories, you'd have to usermdir. (lnandrmwork on symlinks to directories, but we're talking about an actual directory). Also, this doesn't solve the problem, because it requiresrootjust likemv, because of the permissions on/. If you could run this, you could runmvinstead like a normal person.
– Peter Cordes
Mar 20 '18 at 22:59
2
Hardlinks to directories are not supported on most (all?) Unices because it's too difficult for software doing a recursive file system crawl to detect infinite loops. It's possible if the software keeps track of all inodes visited and it's crawling an inode aware filesystem (i.e. not FAT32/NTFS), but checking for symbolic links and not traversing them is much easier. All that's needed is a quick call to lstat(2) to check file type.
– penguin359
Mar 21 '18 at 5:29
1
@Pryftan, myln(1)on Debian says this for the the-d/-F/--directoryoption: "allow the superuser to attempt to hard link directories (note: will probably fail due to system restrictions, even for the superuser)". So you're free to try, but your filesystem probably won't let you.
– Toby Speight
Mar 21 '18 at 10:35
I suppose if the "rm" scares you, you could just skip it and leave the "/usr_bak" link there too. Its the "ln" command that gets you your "/usr" directory link back.
– T.E.D.
Mar 20 '18 at 20:11
I suppose if the "rm" scares you, you could just skip it and leave the "/usr_bak" link there too. Its the "ln" command that gets you your "/usr" directory link back.
– T.E.D.
Mar 20 '18 at 20:11
4
4
I was under the impression that Linux (or at least Ubuntu) does not allow hard links to directories. E.g., askubuntu.com/questions/210741/…
– Chris Bouchard
Mar 20 '18 at 21:03
I was under the impression that Linux (or at least Ubuntu) does not allow hard links to directories. E.g., askubuntu.com/questions/210741/…
– Chris Bouchard
Mar 20 '18 at 21:03
3
3
@Chris: Right, Linux does not allow directory hardlinks (other than
. and .., so the link count on a directory tells you the number of first-level subdirs). Also, rm doesn't work on directories, you'd have to use rmdir. (ln and rm work on symlinks to directories, but we're talking about an actual directory). Also, this doesn't solve the problem, because it requires root just like mv, because of the permissions on /. If you could run this, you could run mv instead like a normal person.– Peter Cordes
Mar 20 '18 at 22:59
@Chris: Right, Linux does not allow directory hardlinks (other than
. and .., so the link count on a directory tells you the number of first-level subdirs). Also, rm doesn't work on directories, you'd have to use rmdir. (ln and rm work on symlinks to directories, but we're talking about an actual directory). Also, this doesn't solve the problem, because it requires root just like mv, because of the permissions on /. If you could run this, you could run mv instead like a normal person.– Peter Cordes
Mar 20 '18 at 22:59
2
2
Hardlinks to directories are not supported on most (all?) Unices because it's too difficult for software doing a recursive file system crawl to detect infinite loops. It's possible if the software keeps track of all inodes visited and it's crawling an inode aware filesystem (i.e. not FAT32/NTFS), but checking for symbolic links and not traversing them is much easier. All that's needed is a quick call to lstat(2) to check file type.
– penguin359
Mar 21 '18 at 5:29
Hardlinks to directories are not supported on most (all?) Unices because it's too difficult for software doing a recursive file system crawl to detect infinite loops. It's possible if the software keeps track of all inodes visited and it's crawling an inode aware filesystem (i.e. not FAT32/NTFS), but checking for symbolic links and not traversing them is much easier. All that's needed is a quick call to lstat(2) to check file type.
– penguin359
Mar 21 '18 at 5:29
1
1
@Pryftan, my
ln(1) on Debian says this for the the -d/-F/--directory option: "allow the superuser to attempt to hard link directories (note: will probably fail due to system restrictions, even for the superuser)". So you're free to try, but your filesystem probably won't let you.– Toby Speight
Mar 21 '18 at 10:35
@Pryftan, my
ln(1) on Debian says this for the the -d/-F/--directory option: "allow the superuser to attempt to hard link directories (note: will probably fail due to system restrictions, even for the superuser)". So you're free to try, but your filesystem probably won't let you.– Toby Speight
Mar 21 '18 at 10:35
|
show 6 more comments
Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f432002%2fafter-accidentally-renaming-usr-how-do-i-rename-it-back%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
Which OS is this? I wonder how
sudoeven got to library stage, it's usually in/usr/bin/and should have failed with a command-not-found error. Also, do you have a root password set?– muru
Mar 19 '18 at 3:24
3
@muru It's Ubuntu. You are right, I did get the error about
not foundbefore so I appended the new path/usr_bak/binto$PATHand now I get the error in my post here...– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 3:27
2
@user1717828 it's complicated. I have to compile a project, developed on Ubuntu 16.04, on Ubuntu 17.10. So I'm thinking if I can simply copy the
/usrof Ubuntu 16.04 to overwrite the/usrof Ubuntu 17.10...– Yves
Mar 19 '18 at 17:55
6
Have you considered using a VM to compile the project instead of such drastic changes?
– Kevin
Mar 19 '18 at 23:50
3
You can run virtualbox in headless mode. It may be easiest to set up a guest on another machine, or get a pre-configured one.
– Kevin
Mar 20 '18 at 1:47