Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: moving default location of portage tree
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2018 18:36:45
Message-Id: 23363.43825.543841.610257@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: moving default location of portage tree by Rich Freeman
1 >>>>> On Mon, 9 Jul 2018, Rich Freeman wrote:
2
3 > I'd also consider /var/cache here as well. FHS specifically suggests
4 > using it for web caches and the like (let's set aside the issue with
5 > making that global), though for the most part it is more metadata
6 > caching. A key principle is that it can be wiped without loss of
7 > data, and I think that is generally true for the repository since it
8 > can be synced.
9
10 I don't think that criterium is fulfilled, because you cannot easily
11 restore the previous state after it's been wiped. At least not when
12 syncing from a rsync mirror (which may have been updated in the mean
13 time).
14
15 Also Portage doesn't treat it likea a cache, i.e. it doesn't start to
16 fetch ebuilds from remote if it doesn't find them in the local tree.
17
18 Ulrich

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: moving default location of portage tree William Hubbs <williamh@g.o>