| 1 |
>>>>> On Fri, 27 Jul 2018, Corentin “Nado” Pazdera wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> July 27, 2018 4:07 PM, "William Hubbs" <williamh@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
>> Section 5.5.2 describes the directory structure of /var/cache. |
| 6 |
>> These paths are all optional [1]. |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> /var/cache/fonts |
| 9 |
>> /var/cache/man |
| 10 |
>> /var/cache/www |
| 11 |
>> /var/cache/<package> |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
>> Gentoo isn't a package, so I don't think /var/cache/gentoo/* is |
| 14 |
>> appropriate. Here is my proposal: |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
>> /usr/portage -> /var/db/repos/gentoo |
| 17 |
>> /usr/portage/distfiles -> /var/cache/portage/distfiles |
| 18 |
>> /usr/portage/packages -> /var/cache/portage/binpkgs |
| 19 |
>> |
| 20 |
>> I'm not 100% comfortable with /var/db, but I don't have any better |
| 21 |
>> suggestion either. |
| 22 |
>> |
| 23 |
>> [1] http://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/FHS_3.0/fhs-3.0.html#varcacheApplicationCacheData |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
> From the same source |
| 26 |
> "No other requirements are made on the data format of the cache |
| 27 |
> directories." |
| 28 |
> And as you have quoted it, everything under /var/cache is optional. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> So anything which doesn't conflict with another package seems fine |
| 31 |
> according to FHS. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
That's how I would read it, too. We could of course invent a package |
| 34 |
name (like "package-manager" for virtual/package-manager) but it seems |
| 35 |
cumbersome, and I don't see any benefit of it. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
There also is /var/cache/fonts, so the FHS itself lists an example of |
| 38 |
a directory that's not named after a specific package. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Ulrich |
Archives