-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On 27/03/12 03:05 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> All,
>
> I know this has come up before, but I don't really recall what the
> specific objections were.
>
> IMO the portage directory doesn't belong under /usr at all. I was
> chatting with another developer who uses
> /var/cache/portage/{tree,distfiles}, and I'm thinking about
> switching my default setup to do this.
>
> I realize that historically the portage tree has been installed
> under /usr, but Can we consider changing this default for new
> installations and providing instructions for users for how to get
> the portage tree out of /usr? William
>
IIRC, 'cache' can be a volatile storage area, that is, anything in it
can be removed. One's system is b0rked (or at least, portage is) if
/path/to/portage/profiles goes missing. I wholeheartedly agree that
distfiles should be moved to /var , but I think the portage tree
shouldn't be there..
(at least, shouldn't be in /var/cache/ ; maybe /var/lib/ ? of course
then we're colliding with the existing use of /var/lib/portage ...)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)
iF4EAREIAAYFAk9yEmYACgkQAJxUfCtlWe0FNAEAyD6zMS/R7P0kltN6J84kAOkM
5LHcznZRWnn6WFyy4CIA+wXNkzDQ5Pim/hqxHylSILlmUUkb+96KvkjX/mmO03eU
=VVCn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
