Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
> * Aaron W. Swenson schrieb am 27.03.12 um 21:59 Uhr:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA256
>> On 03/27/2012 03:47 PM, Alec Warner wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 12:40 PM, William Hubbs
>> Or we can just call it Portage.
>> We call it the "Portage tree", just like we call it gentoo-x86 but
>> that isn't what it only contains, in several places, both in official
>> docs and unofficial docs, tweets, pins, notes, stickies....
>> /var/cache/portage is my vote.
> I like the idea of one directory because I wthink lots of people do
> have that stuff in a dedicated filesystem which today is mounted on
> /usr/portage. It would only have to be mounted to /var/cache/portage
> and this people were done with "migration".
> Having several directories will make it much harder to make "the
> portage stuff" be in its own fs. (be it several fs or symlinks ...)
As a lowly user, I would like it on /var but could careless about the
directory though the above would work fine. Reason, I have /var on its
own partition already. I also have /usr/portage on its own too. Since
the /usr/portage has lots of ever changing files and CAN get fragmented
a lot, this solves a lot of issues since a lot of things in /var are in
the same boat. A user could use a file system that is better at this
sort of thing and have only one partition to handle it all.
Back to my hole. Twice now.
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or
how you interpreted my words!
Miss the compile output? Hint: