| 1 |
Eivind Tagseth <eivindt-gentoo@××××××××.no> writes: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> * Matthew Kennedy <mkennedy@g.o> [2004-01-15 13:29:45 -0600]: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> Meder Bakirov <bakirov@××××××××.kg> writes: |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
>> For /usr/portage/distfiles, I'm not sure. Since it is essentially |
| 8 |
>> architecture independent, I believe the following is appropriate: |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> /usr/portage/distfiles -> /usr/share/portage/distfiles |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> I think the above is in-line with the Linux FHS. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> I'd like to see distfiles somewhere under /var. I don't know if it's |
| 15 |
> just me, but I don't like distfiles/ to be continually growing with |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
[...] |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
IIRC, thats not very standard -- but what do we care. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
/usr/share --> "share" means exactly that -- sharable! It is sharable |
| 22 |
because it is only supposed to contain architecture independent stuff. |
| 23 |
You should be able to share /usr/share via NFS etc. to other machines, |
| 24 |
and I can see that distfiles is a prime candidate for that. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Debian do a stellar job of keeping to this policy. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Having said that, you could make an argument for |
| 29 |
/var/portage/distfiles etc. based on the fact that in a heterogeneous |
| 30 |
environment, distfiles will contain a /few/ architecture-dependent |
| 31 |
sources. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Matt |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Matthew Kennedy |
| 37 |
Gentoo Linux Developer |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
-- |
| 41 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives