From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.2 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_NXDOMAIN, DMARC_MISSING,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from moutvdom00.kundenserver.de (moutvdom00.kundenserver.de [195.20.224.149]) by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 187F1200AD40 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2002 16:52:04 -0600 (CST) Received: from [195.20.224.220] (helo=mrvdom04.kundenserver.de) by moutvdom00.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 16YxNJ-000280-00 for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Thu, 7 Feb 2002 23:50:41 +0100 Received: from [80.130.181.7] (helo=p5082B507.dip.t-dialin.net) by mrvdom04.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 16YxNJ-0006zB-00 for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Thu, 7 Feb 2002 23:50:41 +0100 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] FHS compliance From: Sebastian Werner To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <200202072240.OAA02843@chamber.cco.caltech.edu> References: <3C5BA678.5050802@softhome.net> <20020207110900.A414367@plato.zk3.dec.com> <200202071632.g17GWbe02928@fine1008.math.princeton.edu> <200202072240.OAA02843@chamber.cco.caltech.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Evolution/1.0.2 Date: 07 Feb 2002 23:50:37 +0100 Message-Id: <1013122237.1005.4.camel@wp.smile> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org Errors-To: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.6 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Gentoo Linux developer list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Archives-Salt: 988a4ccf-89c7-4183-bee0-885557b48fc4 X-Archives-Hash: 0b287a0a100c7fa0d19e712afd4886dc Am Don, 2002-02-07 um 22.40 schrieb George Shapovalov: > I would feel uneasy having package database sitting in /var (people quite= =20 > often allocate separate partition for that one to get some protection for= the=20 > rest of the system as this is the one, which changes most often). > Well, in fact I am about /var/db/pkg. To me it was unnatural place to loo= k=20 > for the database of installed packages. I there would be a discussion I w= ould=20 > vote for keeping both portage and db/pkg trees under /usr. >=20 > George >=20 I would like something like: /usr/portage/* -> /usr/share/portage/available /var/db/pkg/* -> /usr/share/portage/installed /usr/portage/profiles -> /usr/share/portage/profiles /usr/portage/distfiles -> /usr/share/portage/archives And the flat hierarchy (as one mails before) of packages in both directories: available and installed! Greetings=20 Sebastian >=20 > On Thursday 07 February 2002 08:32, you wrote: > > I assume the reason that portage is in /usr and db/pkg is in > > /var is that that is where FreeBSD puts ports and db/pkg. > > Of course FreeBSD doesn't have any reason to worry about > > FHS compliance. Since I am compulsive about having up to > > date versions of everything I mount /usr rw, so this is not > > an issue for me personally. > > > > > Chris Moore wrote: [Sat Feb 2 2002, 3:42:32AM ES= T] > > > > > > > Move the portage package ebuild filetree from /usr/portage to > > > > /var/lib/portage ( See 5.8.3 +- and cross reference the > > > > purposes of the /usr hierarchy with the purpose of /var which is > > > > summarized as follows: /usr's purpose is shareable read-only data > > > > (ebuilds are updated!) /var's purpose is sharable/unsharable DYNAMI= C > > > > application data (such as the ebuild dirtree) and /var/lib has the > > > > specific option for the package tool's dynamic data) > > > > > > I'm not sure that the ebuild dirtree should be considered 'dynamic'. > > > The only time it *needs* to be updated (written) is shortly before do= ing > > > a merge. Since the merge is going to be going around writing stuff i= n > > > the /usr tree anyway, updating /usr/portage doesn't seem that bad. I > > > haven't settled on a personal opinion yet, so I'm mostly playing devi= l's > > > advocate here. > > > > > > Consider a normal case where /usr is actually mounted r/o, such as on= a > > > local network of machines where most of the machines mount /usr > > > read-only from a remote file server. In this case, none of these > > > subordinate machines would need to update /usr/portage. If you wante= d > > > to install new software, you would do so on the file server where > > > /usr/bin, /usr/lib, /usr/portage, etc. are all mounted r/w, and > > > therefore you could do the 'emerge rsync' as well package merges. > > > > > > Now that I think about it, this same argument would apply to > > > /var/db/pkg, though, so I guess to be consistant the two (/usr/portag= e > > > and /var/db/pkg) should be in the same place. Do they both belong in > > > /usr? > > > > > > --Chouser > > > _______________________________________________ > > > gentoo-dev mailing list > > > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org > > > http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev > _______________________________________________ > gentoo-dev mailing list > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org > http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev --=20 Sebastian Werner - http://www.werner-productions.de sebastian@werner-productions.de - Bismarckstra=DFe 51 32427 Minden - Mobile: 0179.4590730 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- QOTD: "It's hard to tell whether he has an ace up his sleeve or if the ace is missing from his deck altogether."