W dniu śro, 11.07.2018 o godzinie 18∶11 -0400, użytkownik Richard Yao napisał: > > On Jul 11, 2018, at 4:43 PM, Rich Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 4:34 PM Richard Yao <r...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > > > On my system, /usr/portage is a separate mountpoint. There is no need to > > > have on,h top level directories be separate mountpoints. > > > > It makes sense to follow FHS. Sure, I can work around poor designs by > > sticking mount points all over the place, or manually setting my > > config to put stuff in sane locations. It makes more sense to put all > > the volatile stuff in /var, than to mix it up all over the place and > > get users to set up separate mountpoints to make up for it. > > Is it a violation of the FHS? /usr is for readonly data and the portage tree > is generally readonly, except when being updated. The same is true of > everything else in /usr. > > I am confused as to how we only now realized it was a FHS violation when it > has been there for ~15 years. I was under the impression that /usr was the > correct place for it. > >
And we're back to the usual Gentoo argument of 'it was like this for N years'. So FYI, something 'being there for ~15 years' doesn't make it right. It only means that: a. Gentoo devs were wrong 15 years ago. b. Gentoo devs are still wrong today. c. Gentoo devs can't manage to make such a simple change because they're too concerned about hurting somebody's feelings about a path. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
