On Sun, Feb 06, 2011 at 10:49:30AM +0200, Sergei Trofimovich wrote: > > He already did. He was told to ask here. :-) > > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=351463 (WONTFIX) > > Ah, I see. So, gentoo-dev@ is the way to go :] > > > I can understand that we don't want to automatically change everyone's > > installed Gentoo from /usr/portage to /var/portage but why not try to > > get new installs set up properly? Then perhaps an explanation on how > > existing installs could be migrated for those wanting to do so? > > > > It would seem that all that's required is: > > 1) add an explicit PORTDIR=/usr/portage to /etc/make.conf for existing > > installs (unless PORTDIR is already specified, of course); > > 2) change the default. > > > > Is it really more complicated than that? > > I guess sending proposal with patches to gentoo-dev@ would speed things a bit. >
Sending proposals with patches are likely to be equally ignored and opposed as it is already the fact on this list. So far, those who propose *not* to change it have quite exactly matched my expectations: a) Faulty reasoning, short sighted at times, or at least failed to draw a connection between their alleged "argument" and the issue in question. b) Irrational path of thought. Let me sum up the few s.c. counter arguments we have obtained thus far. I omit the arguments pro the change since they should be most obvious by now. Irrelevant arguments * It is tradition, hence it should be kept * You can always change it Wrong reasoning: * If it would be changed today, we would break the systems of those who did not specify => Nonsense in two regards: 1. With a sudden change portage would simply resync to a new directory, the old tree would rot in /usr 2. Since when are changes the very reason for NOT to change something. That's ridiculous. Ever heard of etc-update, post-install-hooks etc? The update to portage could simply relocate the tree. * If it would be changed today, applications that unconditionally rely on the portage tree to be there will break => Those applications do already break today if one changes the location manually. Which means they are broken already and portage should not be held responsible for catering to a broken application If I missed anything that had at least attempted to appeal to logic, please feel free to add it. Given the reluctance and ignorance we are faced with on gentoo-user@ I have little hope that gentoo-dev@ will be any better, considering that it have been the responsible devs who have proven ignorant and illogical in the past.
