On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 09:45:23PM +0100, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: > again, you are starting from a mistaken premise. > > /usr/portage makes sense, when you consider its history. It may not be the > appropriate decision, but with its background it was logical back then. It was consistent back then, I agree.
> And if something is not broken, don't change it. You do not know what old > tool/setting/whatever might suffocate. As I've pointed out portage in /usr *is* broken. If a tool/setting/whatever might suffocate it 1) does not comply to the current state of gentoo 2) will equally suffocate if you change the location trough make.conf As had been correctly pointed out, the only thing that is really required is chaning the *default* portdir(s) > PORTDIR is not a mere workaround. If you are sure that there is no old crap > lingering around that might expect portdir as /usr/portage, use it. > Workarround/"Change to make it work", that's hair splitting. Again, we are distracted from the actuall issue which is a (noadays) nonsensical default. If I find out that something relies on a fixed portdir, I will report a bug on that. I will not subordinate the correctness of an Issue A to the incorrectnes of an Issue B. > Besides /usr/src/ contains linux and other sources. Wrong too? It is f* > tradition. portage does not contain temporary data or database stuff - that > crap is in /var/db, /var/tmp/portage, /var/lib. So the worst stuff is > somewhere > already. You wanna go there? Take my hand, let's go! But consider it a excursion, nothing related to the issue. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignoratio_elenchi linux sources do not belong in /usr/ either. However, they are historically based there and this tradition is more deeply rooted than a mere wrong location in gentoo's portage design. There are more flaws like that, none of which justifies that portage should do the same mistakes. Portage does exactly contain temporary data. It contains a database in the most exact meaning of the word. Your argument is absurd.
