| 1 |
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 8:43 PM, Aaron W. Swenson <titanofold@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 3 |
> Hash: SHA256 |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> On 03/27/2012 03:05 PM, William Hubbs wrote: |
| 6 |
>> All, |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> I know this has come up before, but I don't really recall what the |
| 9 |
>> specific objections were. |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> IMO the portage directory doesn't belong under /usr at all. I was |
| 12 |
>> chatting with another developer who uses |
| 13 |
>> /var/cache/portage/{tree,distfiles}, and I'm thinking about |
| 14 |
>> switching my default setup to do this. |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
>> I realize that historically the portage tree has been installed |
| 17 |
>> under /usr, but Can we consider changing this default for new |
| 18 |
>> installations and providing instructions for users for how to get |
| 19 |
>> the portage tree out of /usr? William |
| 20 |
>> |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> So, we're all getting way off topic and discussing reorganizing the |
| 23 |
> whole enchilada. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> How about we all agree or disagree on the primary point: The Portage |
| 26 |
> tree doesn't belong in /usr. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> I believe that it does belong under /var/cache/. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
I believe it's /var/lib/<name>. Here's what FHS says: |
| 31 |
/var/cache is intended for cached data from applications. Such data is |
| 32 |
locally generated as a result of time-consuming I/O or calculation. |
| 33 |
The application must be able to regenerate or restore the data. Unlike |
| 34 |
/var/spool, the cached files can be deleted without data loss. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
And: |
| 37 |
/var/lib/<name> is the location that must be used for all distribution |
| 38 |
packaging support. |
Archives