On 03/27/12 15:13, Aaron W. Swenson wrote:
> On 03/27/2012 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
> 
> 
> But, that'd violate the spirit of usrmove!
> 
> Seriously, I don't have a strong opinion on it either way. It should
> be placed in /var as a way to kind of hint that the files there
> shouldn't be edited.
> 
> - Aaron
> 

To be honest, the location should not matter. As long as make.conf sets
PORTAGE_DIR correctly, we can put it anywhere. With that said,
/var/portage might better reflect the variable nature of the tree, but I
don't think that would imply that it should not be edited.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to