Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Aaron W. Swenson" <titanofold@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: location of portage tree
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 19:22:59
Message-Id: 4F7364A3.3090504@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: location of portage tree by Christoph Mende
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA256
3
4 On 03/28/2012 02:53 PM, Christoph Mende wrote:
5 > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 8:43 PM, Aaron W. Swenson
6 > <titanofold@g.o> wrote:
7 >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
8 >>
9 >> On 03/27/2012 03:05 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
10 >>> All,
11 >>>
12 >>> I know this has come up before, but I don't really recall what
13 >>> the specific objections were.
14 >>>
15 >>> IMO the portage directory doesn't belong under /usr at all. I
16 >>> was chatting with another developer who uses
17 >>> /var/cache/portage/{tree,distfiles}, and I'm thinking about
18 >>> switching my default setup to do this.
19 >>>
20 >>> I realize that historically the portage tree has been
21 >>> installed under /usr, but Can we consider changing this default
22 >>> for new installations and providing instructions for users for
23 >>> how to get the portage tree out of /usr? William
24 >>>
25 >>
26 >> So, we're all getting way off topic and discussing reorganizing
27 >> the whole enchilada.
28 >>
29 >> How about we all agree or disagree on the primary point: The
30 >> Portage tree doesn't belong in /usr.
31 >>
32 >> I believe that it does belong under /var/cache/.
33 >
34 > I believe it's /var/lib/<name>. Here's what FHS says: /var/cache is
35 > intended for cached data from applications. Such data is locally
36 > generated as a result of time-consuming I/O or calculation. The
37 > application must be able to regenerate or restore the data. Unlike
38 > /var/spool, the cached files can be deleted without data loss.
39 >
40 > And: /var/lib/<name> is the location that must be used for all
41 > distribution packaging support.
42 >
43
44 'Support' is the keyword here. The repositories are regenerated given
45 machinesan 'emerge --sync' and can be considered as temporary as the
46 packages themselves are impermanent. Further, the repository isn't
47 required to persist. If somebody really wanted to be hard on our
48 infrastructure, they could do an 'emerge --sync' at boot to repopulate
49 /var/cache/gentoo-repos/.
50
51 Portage PMS already does the right thing and uses /var/lib/ for the
52 appropriate use, config and world, things that need to persist between
53 reboots.
54 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
55 Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)
56 Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
57
58 iF4EAREIAAYFAk9zZKMACgkQVxOqA9G7/aCcUAD+JEnR5dE1S7QNUr+8zNFzh/kR
59 hlnZUXopuQSrMhxjxYEA/AlT2I5p4KEiGybgDELTnVNqOHNKlpO5RepBMjhII1Yy
60 =sjCv
61 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: location of portage tree Kent Fredric <kentfredric@×××××.com>