| 1 |
On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 4:13 PM Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> W dniu pon, 09.07.2018 o godzinie 15∶11 -0500, użytkownik William Hubbs |
| 4 |
> napisał: |
| 5 |
> > On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 08:43:31PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 6 |
> > > sys-apps/portage-mgorny has already done that. The defaults locations |
| 7 |
> > > have been changed to: |
| 8 |
> > > |
| 9 |
> > > DISTDIR="/var/cache/portage/distfiles" |
| 10 |
> > > PKGDIR="/var/cache/portage/packages" |
| 11 |
> > > RPMDIR="/var/cache/portage/rpm" |
| 12 |
> > > |
| 13 |
> > > Plus repositories are in /var/db/repos/<name>. This is also the layout |
| 14 |
> > > used by eselect-repository. |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > I like this idea, but slightly different; I think we should stay out of |
| 17 |
> > /var/db. We don't want folks to go messing around in there and nuke |
| 18 |
> > /var/db/pkg by mistake. |
| 19 |
> > |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Following that reasoning, we shouldn't use /var at all because people |
| 22 |
> might 'go messing around in there and nuke /var/* by mistake'. Or any |
| 23 |
> directory. Our only hope is Windows where we can create P:\ and not |
| 24 |
> worry that people might 'go messing around in there and nuke the system |
| 25 |
> by mistake'. |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
++ |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Though I do prefer /var/lib or /var/cache over /var/db, simply because |
| 31 |
/var/lib is actually in FHS. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
That said, all my comments should be taken as suggestions. I don't |
| 34 |
really have a huge concern with most of these proposals. Any of them |
| 35 |
are better than /usr, with distfiles being stacked inside the repo |
| 36 |
(ugh!). |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
-- |
| 40 |
Rich |
Archives