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=-0.1 required=5.0 tests=DMARC_NONE, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from zmamail05.zma.compaq.com (zmamail05.zma.compaq.com [161.114.64.105]) by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A129200AD44 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2002 10:10:27 -0600 (CST) Received: from mailrelay01.cac.cpqcorp.net (mailrelay01.cac.cpqcorp.net [16.47.132.152]) by zmamail05.zma.compaq.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BB9649B9 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2002 11:09:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from oflume.zk3.dec.com (bryflume.zk3.dec.com [16.141.40.17]) by mailrelay01.cac.cpqcorp.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6364143E for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2002 08:09:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from yquarry.zk3.dec.com by oflume.zk3.dec.com (8.11.6/1.1.22.3/03Mar00-0551AM) id g17G9Cq23463; Thu, 7 Feb 2002 11:09:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from plato.zk3.dec.com by yquarry.zk3.dec.com (8.11.6/1.1.22.3/03Mar00-0551AM) id g17G9B105792; Thu, 7 Feb 2002 11:09:12 -0500 (EST) Received: by plato.zk3.dec.com (8.9.3/1.1.29.3/09Apr01-0437PM) id LAA0000414495; Thu, 7 Feb 2002 11:09:00 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 11:09:00 -0500 From: Chris Houser To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] FHS compliance Message-ID: <20020207110900.A414367@plato.zk3.dec.com> References: <3C5BA678.5050802@softhome.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3C5BA678.5050802@softhome.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i 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: 76a53f8f-cb42-4a02-b90d-eaf937b8900c X-Archives-Hash: 643cdb0c24d54ccbc72212388222aaf3 Chris Moore wrote: [Sat Feb 2 2002, 3:42:32AM EST] > 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 DYNAMIC > 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 doing a merge. Since the merge is going to be going around writing stuff in 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 devil'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 wanted 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/portage and /var/db/pkg) should be in the same place. Do they both belong in /usr? --Chouser