1 |
On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 00:22:34 +0200 |
2 |
Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On 13/08/2015 00:21, James Le Cuirot wrote: |
5 |
> > On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 00:11:45 +0200 |
6 |
> > Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> wrote: |
7 |
> > |
8 |
> >> On 12/08/2015 23:29, James Le Cuirot wrote: |
9 |
> >>> Mike Frysinger <vapier <at> gentoo.org> writes: |
10 |
> >>>> |
11 |
> >>>> On 10 Aug 2015 09:17, Michał Górny wrote: |
12 |
> >>>>> Dnia 2015-08-10, o godz. 02:42:21 Mike Frysinger napisał(a): |
13 |
> >>>>>> On 10 Aug 2015 08:28, Justin (jlec) wrote: |
14 |
> >>>>>>> I like to propose to add the md5-cache into it. Which other |
15 |
> >>>>>>> files are of interest? |
16 |
> >>>>>> |
17 |
> >>>>>> /distfiles/ |
18 |
> >>>>>> /local/ |
19 |
> >>>>>> /packages/ |
20 |
> >>>>> |
21 |
> >>>>> Those directories should not be ignored. Those should not exist |
22 |
> >>>>> for a long time. |
23 |
> >>>> |
24 |
> >>>> there's no reason people can't use these on their own system. |
25 |
> >>>> there's no reason they should be added to the git repo which |
26 |
> >>>> means, if a user opted to utilize them, they should be ignored. |
27 |
> >>> |
28 |
> >>> I agree and I'm not sure what mgorny is basing his statement on |
29 |
> >>> anyway. Apart from /local/, which I forget the purpose of, the |
30 |
> >>> default locations for DISTDIR and PKGDIR still seem to |
31 |
> >>> be /usr/portage/distfiles and /usr/portage/packages. I must admit |
32 |
> >>> that I'm struggling to find the logic for this in Portage but |
33 |
> >>> those are the defaults nonetheless. So why would they not exist? |
34 |
> >>> I'm certainly using them here and I would like to see them |
35 |
> >>> in .gitignore. |
36 |
> >> |
37 |
> >> /usr/portage/local was the original location for the user's own |
38 |
> >> personal ebuild space - an "overlay" if you will. |
39 |
> >> /usr/portage/distfiles and /usr/portage/packages are there because |
40 |
> >> that's where ports has put them for decades, and no-one has gotten |
41 |
> >> around to changing it in portage yet. FreeBSD defines the use |
42 |
> >> of /usr very differently to what Linux users are used to. |
43 |
> >> |
44 |
> >> Those dirs really should be in /var/portage, and the user's overlay |
45 |
> >> has no business being under main tree itself |
46 |
> > |
47 |
> > I didn't say they were the most appropriate locations and I agree |
48 |
> > that /var/portage is best but that doesn't change the fact that they |
49 |
> > are still the defaults. :) |
50 |
> > |
51 |
> |
52 |
> Indeed. And it's equally true they should be git ignored. |
53 |
> |
54 |
> |
55 |
> |
56 |
> |
57 |
|
58 |
Two things... |
59 |
|
60 |
1) /var/portage is ABSOLUTELY the wrong name. with teh move which |
61 |
should happen soon, it will be named gentoo just like the repo name. |
62 |
The final location path is not yet 100% set and will not likely come to |
63 |
any agreement amongst the populous. It hasn't yet ;) But is will end |
64 |
up somewhere in /var/.../repos/gentoo most likely. The MAIN reason, is |
65 |
there is often too much confusion between portage the package manager |
66 |
and portage the "gentoo" ebuild tree. So to follow the overlay naming |
67 |
rules for inclusion in the repositories.xml file, the directory name |
68 |
must be the same as the repo name. |
69 |
|
70 |
2) There is another alternate location that you can define files to |
71 |
ignore locally without having to commit them to .gitignore. |
72 |
Consider .gitignore a global setting. There is another setting |
73 |
inside .git/info/exclude which is a local config file that will persist |
74 |
and not be affected by pulls. |
75 |
|
76 |
So please use that for local exclusions you want to add and not try to |
77 |
force them into a global .gitignore which is part of the repo. |
78 |
Something that seems to be hotly debated. ;) |
79 |
|
80 |
|
81 |
-- |
82 |
Brian Dolbec <dolsen> |