From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A7542138334 for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 19:56:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AA24BE091F; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 19:56:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 222A4E08F5 for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 19:56:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-it0-f41.google.com (mail-it0-f41.google.com [209.85.214.41]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mattst88) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AC956335C96 for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 19:56:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-it0-f41.google.com with SMTP id 16-v6so14441485itl.5 for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 12:56:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlEzu9DYcbnWjZCuBjlBF4NbQ7/7wzPnekFdIbDSryaX+yt+JOwS Dhn9VHJMEfNMLJ5NLba59xzcTpaLNvStwO8fyH4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpdybyqBNb0hmfY1AujtDkbA6JlgWtpl2u7rtKBS0hWv18NSe8aaZ03oPZkjaz7zkX/d7m9/kqlBUeqiF9FM1tY= X-Received: by 2002:a24:52d4:: with SMTP id d203-v6mr12037988itb.17.1532894203750; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 12:56:43 -0700 (PDT) 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 Received: by 2002:a02:7126:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 12:56:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <23386.55441.474410.12939@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> References: <23368.25818.481969.336756@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20180713065734.63627e6f@professor-x> <23368.58952.48436.482420@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <23368.64354.849449.669215@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <23369.2669.259722.764432@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <23375.3755.971322.887796@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <23386.55441.474410.12939@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> From: Matt Turner Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2018 12:56:23 -0700 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: moving default location of portage tree (was: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2018-07-29) To: gentoo development Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 1e8e0772-a976-4fb1-a8f8-191da5607efd X-Archives-Hash: cd82c7714f07b89346c2d013e2115d78 On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 1:32 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: >>>>>> On Thu, 19 Jul 2018, Ch=C3=AD-Thanh Christopher Nguy=E1=BB=85n wrote= : > >>> Users must never need to modify files in /var/lib to configure a >>> package's operation, and _the_specific_file_hierarchy_ used to >>> store the data _must_not_be_ _exposed_ to regular users." > >> One small note, while it is never needed to modify, skel.ebuild >> would then be a file that is meant to be accessed by users in >> /var/lib if your proposal is realized. > > That's one of the reasons why the proposal prefers /var/db. The other > reason is existing usage in eselect-repository. > >>>>>> On Thu, 19 Jul 2018, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > >> In my understanding, a cache is typically an open collection of items. >> Some subset of them can be deleted without much negative consequence, >> and there may also be surplus items that are no longer necessary and >> will be expired at some later time in order to reclaim disk space. > >> Nothing of this is true for an ebuild repository, which is a closed >> collection of files: A single file cannot be discarded without >> invalidating the whole repository. Also there cannot be any stray >> files which would be expired later. Same as above, a single stray file >> will invalidate all. > >> (A collection of binary packages may qualify as a cache though, by >> this definition.) > > So, considering all the feedback from mailing list and IRC: > > /usr/portage -> /var/db/repos/gentoo > /usr/portage/distfiles -> /var/cache{,/gentoo}/distfiles > /usr/portage/packages -> /var/cache{,/gentoo}/binpkgs > > Open question: Should we have the additional "gentoo" path component > for the ones in /var/cache? The tradeoff is between a path that is > easier to type, or slightly easier usage if someone wants to NFS mount > distfiles and binpkgs. That proposal has by vote of support. No strong preference on whether to include gentoo/ or not. It's one NFS mount vs two so not a big deal either way.