| 1 |
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 11:36 AM Raymond Jennings <shentino@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> I do think it would be a wise idea to "grandfather" the current layout |
| 4 |
> for awhile. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
I don't see why we would ever stop supporting it, at least in general. |
| 8 |
Maybe if some day somebody had a solution for a read-only /usr with |
| 9 |
signature checking that might require portage to be mounted elsewhere, |
| 10 |
but I don't ever see that becoming the default. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Portage just looks for the repository where you tell it to. If you |
| 13 |
tell it that the repository is in /var, it will use it. If you put it |
| 14 |
in /tmp, that's fine too. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
This is just about the default, which should follow FHS. The case of |
| 17 |
separate mounts is exactly why /usr is a bad spot - the access |
| 18 |
patterns for something like the repository have far more in common |
| 19 |
with /var than /usr. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Rich |
Archives