Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Markos Chandras <hwoarang@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Moving our/portage stuff to var
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 18:21:35
Message-Id: CAG2jQ8gVMZ2qSbGqZ1R6zUwmqrRptZFZWy5XTKJ7aCRtqjJjWQ@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Moving our/portage stuff to var by Ulrich Mueller
1 On 20 December 2012 17:44, Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote:
2 >>>>>> On Thu, 20 Dec 2012, Michael Mol wrote:
3 >
4 >>>>> /var/cache/portage/distfiles
5 >>>>> /var/cache/portage/repositories/gentoo
6 >>>>> /var/cache/portage/repositories/{sunrise,kde,gnome,whatever,layman,grabs}
7 >>>>> /var/db/portage/repositories/{non-cache,repo,names,go,here}
8 >
9 >>> -1
10 >>>
11 >>> The subdirs are too deeply nested. (Ebuilds would be at the eighth
12 >>> level then...)
13 >
14 >> Maybe I missed something...but what's wrong with that?
15 >
16 > There's no good reason for nesting it so deeply. As it is proposed
17 > above, /var/cache/portage would contain only two subdirectories, and
18 > /var/cache/portage/repositories only a single "gentoo" on a stable
19 > system. Also /var/cache itself isn't overpopulated; I count about ten
20 > entries on my systems.
21 >
22 > We should go with a shorter (easier to remember, easier to type) path
23 > and move things at least one level up. Two would be even better.
24 >
25 >>> Let's put the tree in /var/cache/portage please, and distfiles in
26 >>> /var/cache/distfiles. Layman overlays can stay where they are, or
27 >>> move to /var/cache/layman.
28 >
29 > Ulrich
30 >
31
32 Yeah +1 to that. Makes more sense to me
33
34 --
35 Regards,
36 Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2