Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: moving default location of portage tree

[Michał Górny]

W dniu śro, 11.07.2018 o godzinie 18∶26 -0400, użytkownik Richard Yao
napisał:
> > On Jul 11, 2018, at 6:23 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
> >
> > W dniu śro, 11.07.2018 o godzinie 18∶11 -0400, użytkownik Richard Yao
> > napisał:
> > > > > On Jul 11, 2018, at 4:43 PM, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 4:34 PM Richard Yao <ryao@g.o> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On my system, /usr/portage is a separate mountpoint. There is no need to have on,h top level directories be separate mountpoints.
> > > >
> > > > It makes sense to follow FHS.  Sure, I can work around poor designs by
> > > > sticking mount points all over the place, or manually setting my
> > > > config to put stuff in sane locations.  It makes more sense to put all
> > > > the volatile stuff in /var, than to mix it up all over the place and
> > > > get users to set up separate mountpoints to make up for it.
> > >
> > > Is it a violation of the FHS? /usr is for readonly data and the portage tree is generally readonly, except when being updated. The same is true of everything else in /usr.
> > >
> > > I am confused as to how we only now realized it was a FHS violation when it has been there for ~15 years. I was under the impression that /usr was the correct place for it.
> > > >
> >
> > And we're back to the usual Gentoo argument of 'it was like this for
> > N years'.  So FYI, something 'being there for ~15 years' doesn't make it
> > right.  It only means that:
> >
> > a. Gentoo devs were wrong 15 years ago.
> >
> > b. Gentoo devs are still wrong today.
> >
> > c. Gentoo devs can't manage to make such a simple change because they're
> > too concerned about hurting somebody's feelings about a path.
>
> This does not answer my question. Is it really a FHS violation? The contents of /usr changes when doing updates using the system package manager. When not doing updates, it really is readonly and the FHS says that /usr is for readonly things. I do not see how it is different from anything else in /usr.
>

You are bending the definition to the limit.

1. Repository updates can be done as unprivileged user (and it's
generally insane to --sync as root when you can do it unprivileged!).

2. Package managers can update repository cache while *not* performing
system updates.  This is writing.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny