1 |
mån 2010-01-18 klockan 12:40 +0100 skrev Michael Haubenwallner: |
2 |
> Alex Alexander wrote: |
3 |
> > On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 09:05:58AM +0100, Peter Hjalmarsson wrote: |
4 |
> >> I sometimes think the main problem is the tree itself. Portage really |
5 |
> >> should had a directory of its own, but maybe with anoher structure, |
6 |
> >> like /var/portage, /var/portage/tree (the current |
7 |
> >> PORTDIR), /var/portage/distfiles (i.e. split out distfiles from the tree |
8 |
> >> itself), /var/portage/overlays/layman or /var/portage/layman. |
9 |
> >> I of course realize that change the structure of the whole portdir would |
10 |
> >> had inresting complications, so take this comment just as serious as you |
11 |
> >> like. |
12 |
> <snip> |
13 |
> > /var/portage/ |
14 |
> > /var/portage/tree |
15 |
> > /var/portage/layman |
16 |
> > /var/portage/overlays (non-layman managed, layman could also be in here) |
17 |
> > /var/portage/distfiles |
18 |
> > /var/portage/packages |
19 |
> |
20 |
> Not that I really care, but are these "portage-only" and we might need |
21 |
> /var/{paludis,pkgcore,...}/*? So what about /var/gentoo/*? |
22 |
> |
23 |
> /haubi/ |
24 |
|
25 |
I think "gentoo" is too non-specific. "portage" is more or less a good |
26 |
name for everything with regards to the package management in gentoo. |
27 |
|
28 |
That there is a name collision between that and the default |
29 |
implementation of a package manager I see just as an coincidence. |
30 |
Just like Gentoo both can refer to a distribution and a file-browser. |
31 |
Or RPM is both a file-format and a tool to handle said file format. |