1 |
Michael Hampicke posted on Tue, 25 Dec 2012 10:09:15 +0100 as excerpted: |
2 |
|
3 |
> Am 24.12.2012 17:09, schrieb Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina: |
4 |
>> On 12/24/2012 09:00 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: |
5 |
|
6 |
>>> Not sure how /var/cache fits for binpkgs though, tbh. |
7 |
>> |
8 |
>> No sure how it doesn't... |
9 |
>> |
10 |
>> Binpackages are really essentially cache created by portage through |
11 |
>> time-consuming I/O and calculation (compiling) and can easily be |
12 |
>> regenerated locally. Plus, you can delete all of this and the system |
13 |
>> is still functional. |
14 |
> |
15 |
> Not that I am opposed to keep binpackages in /var/cache - but people on |
16 |
> this thread have brought up lot's of reasons why for certain aspects not |
17 |
> to keep certain data in certain places. |
18 |
|
19 |
Also, consider what happens if gcc or the like breaks. Normally those |
20 |
with FEATURES=binpkg can still revert to their last known working binpkg, |
21 |
and this has long been listed as one of the reasons people should |
22 |
consider enabling binpkgs. But if it's gone due to "cache cleanup" and |
23 |
gcc is broken... |
24 |
|
25 |
A system reinstall from binpkgs sure speeds things up if you fatfinger an |
26 |
rm --recursive or some such, as well. Basically, you're installing a |
27 |
custom bindistro in that case, making PKGDIR more a binpkg repository |
28 |
than a simple cache of individual packages. It is for this reason I keep |
29 |
my binpkgs on a dedicated partition, and back it up, something I do NOT |
30 |
do with the gentoo ebuild tree, the kernel tree, or ccache, which to me |
31 |
ARE caches, while my binpkg dir isn't. |
32 |
|
33 |
But I set the vars myself so what the defaults are isn't a big deal, here. |
34 |
|
35 |
-- |
36 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
37 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
38 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |