| 1 |
El sáb, 16-01-2010 a las 17:16 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan escribió: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 4:41 PM, Lars Wendler <polynomial-c@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> >> It's just impossible to choose perfect location that suits all needs and |
| 4 |
> >> it should stay user-configurable. So again, do not change this default |
| 5 |
> >> we no real need another time, please. |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > /usr/local is a bad choice for an ebuild-generated default. Like I said in bug |
| 8 |
> > #253725 I don't want ebuilds to mess with stuff in /usr/local. So either remove |
| 9 |
> > this default completely and let the user decide when setting up layman or move |
| 10 |
> > it around. |
| 11 |
> > The best suggestions I've read here for now were either /var/layman or |
| 12 |
> > /usr/layman which I would have no problem with. |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> /me throws in /usr/share/layman |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> OTOH, I really think /usr/local/layman is OK as long as it's |
| 18 |
> runtime-generated and not added by the ebuild. That should satisfy bug |
| 19 |
> 253725, and prevent another painful location move. It also makes sense |
| 20 |
> from the "/usr/local is user/admin domain" since only running the |
| 21 |
> layman tool will cause those directories to be created. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
From my (layman user) point of view I am still using /usr/portage/local |
| 25 |
for it because I prefer to have all "portage trees" in the same place. |
| 26 |
Maybe another option could be to have a /usr/portage/overlays directory |
| 27 |
used for "unofficial" overlays, then, layman configuration stuff (like |
| 28 |
its make.conf and so) could be present under /etc/layman, while overlays |
| 29 |
(sunrise, gnome...) could be installed under /usr/portage/overlays |
Archives