| 1 |
On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Luca Barbato <lu_zero@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Fabio Rossi wrote: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> I'm proposing to reorganize the files related to Gentoo inside /var/lib. |
| 5 |
>> Currently we have this situation (at least on my system): |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> /var/lib/eselect |
| 8 |
>> /var/lib/gentoo/enews |
| 9 |
>> /var/lib/herdstat/ |
| 10 |
>> /var/lib/module-rebuild |
| 11 |
>> /var/lib/portage |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
>> The main dir should be something like /var/lib/gentoo, so I'd see all |
| 14 |
>> gentoo-related files as |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
>> /var/lib/gentoo/eselect |
| 17 |
>> /var/lib/gentoo/enews |
| 18 |
>> /var/lib/gentoo/herdstat/ |
| 19 |
>> /var/lib/gentoo/module-rebuild |
| 20 |
>> /var/lib/gentoo/portage |
| 21 |
>> |
| 22 |
>> What do you think about? |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> Looks quite wrong. I'd do /var/lib/gentoo/enews -> /var/lib/enews btw |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
A few things, mostly relating to trying to convince me to fix this |
| 27 |
(being open source, you could easily fix it yourself). |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
1) There is no right or wrong place to put data, specifically if we |
| 30 |
state that we do not follow standards (like the FHS) that may in fact |
| 31 |
make specific recommendations, and we have done so in the past. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
2) There is not a real problem (technically) with the current |
| 34 |
placement, aside from some people think it is odd. I am unaware of |
| 35 |
users that are trying to put /var/lib/ on an NFS mount but can't |
| 36 |
because of our scheme; or other ideas for which the current scheme |
| 37 |
limits users. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
3) Moving is costly. |
| 40 |
- We have to author code to migrate existing news repositories |
| 41 |
- We have to author code to check both places (at a minimum, to |
| 42 |
migrate the old repository, possibly at runtime, or to warn them of |
| 43 |
the old repository) |
| 44 |
- How long will this code remain in the codebase (forever?) |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
4) The benefits are slim. |
| 47 |
- /var/lib is more orderly for a subset of users. |
| 48 |
- What else? |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
The point is we make decisions all the time and some of them are bad |
| 51 |
and are expensive to fix and we have to live with them. |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
The location was actually specified in the GLEP[1] so part of me asks |
| 54 |
why this was not brought up then (it was a design defect; and not an |
| 55 |
implementation defect). Data from software engineers tends to show |
| 56 |
that defects in the design phase that are caught in the maintenance |
| 57 |
phase tend to be very expensive to fix and I think there are bigger |
| 58 |
fish to fry in the package manager world; but feel free to send a |
| 59 |
patch as always (this is OSS after all). |
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
[1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0042.html#client-side |
| 62 |
|
| 63 |
> |
| 64 |
> lu |
| 65 |
> |
| 66 |
> -- |
| 67 |
> |
| 68 |
> Luca Barbato |
| 69 |
> Gentoo Council Member |
| 70 |
> Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC |
| 71 |
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero |
| 72 |
> |
| 73 |
> |
| 74 |
> |
Archives