| 1 |
On Thursday 15 January 2004 19:27, Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
| 2 |
> I think the original poster was more concerned about being able to RO |
| 3 |
> mount /usr than caring what the FHS states. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
You were wrong :) |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
http://www.samba.org/~cyeoh/fhs-2.3-beta.pdf |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Chapter 2. The Filesystem --> Rationale |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
I'm concerned on benefits, FHS gives us ;) |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> On Thu, 2004-01-15 at 09:09, Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote: |
| 15 |
> > Georgi Georgiev wrote: |
| 16 |
> > > maillog: 15/01/2004-16:36:35(+0900): Jason Stubbs types |
| 17 |
> > > |
| 18 |
> > >>> You can set PORTDIR to point your portage tree wherever you like. |
| 19 |
> > >> |
| 20 |
> > >> Just make sure to update the /etc/make.profile symlink. |
| 21 |
> > > |
| 22 |
> > > Alternative: |
| 23 |
> > > |
| 24 |
> > > echo "/var/portage /usr/portage auto auto,bind 0 0" >> /etc/fstab |
| 25 |
> > |
| 26 |
> > But, as far as the filesystem appears, this would still be against the |
| 27 |
> > standard (cd /usr/portage will still work) and thus, you may as well just |
| 28 |
> > leave it in /usr/portage. |
| 29 |
> > |
| 30 |
> > Tom Veldhouse |
| 31 |
> > |
| 32 |
> > |
| 33 |
> > -- |
| 34 |
> > gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives