From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3CBF1381F3 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 14:15:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id ABF1421C003; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 14:15:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55355E0662 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 14:14:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.132] (CPE002401f30b73-CM001cea3ddad8.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com [99.242.65.202]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: axs) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 66AD133DB27 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 14:14:26 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <50D1CBC9.8000806@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 09:14:33 -0500 From: Ian Stakenvicius User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.11) Gecko/20121208 Thunderbird/10.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Moving our/portage stuff to var References: <20121218222046.3f57a21f@brain.lan> <7546589.4cZ9dCx8p9@bart> <50D1B94F.3080201@flameeyes.eu> <20689.50332.706030.896119@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <50D1C79C.3000809@flameeyes.eu> In-Reply-To: <50D1C79C.3000809@flameeyes.eu> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: 82c44309-cf24-4d8a-abbc-3acb50c81883 X-Archives-Hash: ab22aa2eb5f6e68cd8dbb3ebd70869b1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 19/12/12 08:56 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: > > That's why my suggestion is to use /var/cache: it makes it clear > that there is no definitive reason to back it up (as Justin said > there is an issue with distfiles you can't re-download but that's a > different story I'd say — maybe setting a default read-only distdir > for said packages might make sense, but I don't want to get there > at all). In terms of the fact that a current copy of the portage tree is always available, no it isn't necessary to back it up. However, if one isn't constantly maintaining their system via -uDN and doing say, updates on a monthly cycle (ie, production systems), then it is very useful to maintain the same portage tree snapshot as the system's last -uDN ... As such I would argue that it is worthwhile to back it up. Similarly, 'packages' should probably stay synchronized with the tree. So in terms of the above, would that mean /var/lib is a better fit? or would that mean /var/cache and it is up to the user to add their own backup of /var/cache/portage ? Distfiles, imo, are definitely just cache and can be discarded at any time. There are issues if one has a very old tree that some distfiles disappear from the mirrors (especially gentoo patchset tarballs) but such is life -- personally I'd like to see all such files stored on a dev's webspace in perpetuity so that SRC_URI could grab it from there after it's dropped from the mirrors. As for "special" distfiles (fetch-restricted etc), these would need to be downloaded manually anyways and if they are of value they should be backed up elsewhere (ie, not rely on the distfiles dir to keep them). Either of i.e. /var/cache/{distfiles,packages,portage} or /var/cache/portage/{distfiles,packages,tree} works for me; i can see the extra directory level keeping all portage bits together as looking nicer for the end user but meh. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlDRy8kACgkQ2ugaI38ACPAiLQD9HeENg+cPrkQcHhPF54h1AaPG hvTvaq4GaghMNXCKV7sBAKz8cKR6LD8grvuTnftWVJiRYYbhYM+HANTaE5xWs6f+ =WPmW -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----