1 |
On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 3:20 PM Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> >>>>> On Fri, 13 Jul 2018, Rich Freeman wrote: |
4 |
> |
5 |
> > For the directory under each I suggest a gentoo/portage parent |
6 |
> > directory, and then a tree underneath: |
7 |
> > .../gentoo/repos/gentoo (this is PMS) |
8 |
> > .../gentoo/repos/myoverlay (this is PMS) |
9 |
> > .../gentoo/packages (I'm not sure if this is PMS - move to portage if not) |
10 |
> > .../gentoo/distfiles (I don't think this is PMS, but it is so |
11 |
> > generic that it probably should be considered shared) |
12 |
> |
13 |
> Why the "gentoo" path component? That's not a package, and therefore |
14 |
> not compliant with the FHS. (Or even worse, it actually _is_ a |
15 |
> package, namely app-misc/gentoo.) |
16 |
|
17 |
From FHS: |
18 |
/var/lib/<name> is the location that must be used for all distribution |
19 |
packaging support. Different distributions may use different names, of |
20 |
course. |
21 |
|
22 |
p34: https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/FHS_3.0/fhs-3.0.pdf |
23 |
|
24 |
> |
25 |
> > /var/lib/gentoo/repos/gentoo (I'm fine with cache here as well) |
26 |
> |
27 |
> Here we're at 5 path components again. I will likely vote against any |
28 |
> proposal that would put the tree such deep in the hierarchy. And the |
29 |
> double "gentoo" adds some extra ugliness. |
30 |
|
31 |
Well, /var/lib/<something> is 3 right there. If 5 is no good then you |
32 |
only have one left. We could just make it /var/lib/repos which seems |
33 |
non-compliant. Or we can make it /var/lib/gentoo/myoverlay which is |
34 |
great until we have an overlay called distfiles or whatever. |
35 |
|
36 |
And if it is just the double gentoo I guess there is /var/lib/gentoo/repos/main |
37 |
|
38 |
Unless we want to put overlays somewhere entirely different, in which |
39 |
case we could just use /var/lib/gentoo/repo I guess. But, I think it |
40 |
makes more sense to view the gentoo repo as just the main repo out of |
41 |
many. |
42 |
|
43 |
> > /var/cache/gentoo/packages (These are package builds and are |
44 |
> > completely reproducible.) |
45 |
> > /var/cache/gentoo/distfiles (This is literally a network cache/mirror) |
46 |
> > /var/cache/portage/edb (This is portage-specific, |
47 |
> > but it can be regenerated) |
48 |
> > /var/lib/portage/pkg (This is the must-preserve |
49 |
> > metadata state of the system, in portage's internal format.) |
50 |
> |
51 |
> Why not keep this at /var/db/pkg? That's the path mentioned in PMS. |
52 |
|
53 |
Why not put all of this stuff in /var/db? Or in /var/gentoo? Or in /gentoo? |
54 |
|
55 |
It isn't FHS. FHS actually specifically says that stuff in /var/db |
56 |
should go to /var/lib/misc or a pkg-specific directory (p35 footnote 5 |
57 |
- above link). Yeah, I get that BSD sticks it in /var/db. But BSD |
58 |
also sticks the repo in /usr/ports. |
59 |
|
60 |
But, if you want to leave /var/db/pkg alone at least moving the rest |
61 |
is a step in the right direction. |
62 |
|
63 |
-- |
64 |
Rich |