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 244CE138334 for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 20:02:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B42EFE092F; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 20:02:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pg1-f177.google.com (mail-pg1-f177.google.com [209.85.215.177]) (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 537AAE08F5 for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 20:02:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pg1-f177.google.com with SMTP id d17-v6so1607717pgv.10 for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 13:02:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=HXaqxcIhJegnPXJFH20SCom6ZjpC+z1i9uC4bfvwQEg=; b=cjRRAvbt+mjVbXunsATYo2L/tu68ingvM8LQW0n5agxl0enKC+C9tKrhA4I5w5iS8I 7CKoSgPQfD4a4kxD7iY3/7QKrbb2jpxAn+1j9bYXfHwNiOt+TKRr8wmsDvsst+UK5xPD QYxRsLQ1N6vIh0kPS0He2gRTEs/L/v3einh9WCuz1bKgW8R4Jsm2MSo4ghFysF9tdmhG 4WbJuA0DkmaJOUjPs178b0v6WAqmeSufXXd5EbwX/aDNgQhsEHEbxtr/KHOAuvzVw8jT 891CDZ9n14S/XLuU8/XKATNmhcibxKjLObyczzOW/HbOt5djdrwCyTDDDrd4P6Wj5mqg XCNg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlGGhSJuLizNaVaJgPmRlcm2C5xc4EAwrzO4WMaaSyHVSRrZqbE3 OkeKfjV2kX1szdyyW0K/88tXq8f3ScXVZfDWGY6LmoO+ X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpdjZTkpEDOnsGTrl2eQh3VrjgpXQ71+BieJiWkbxtc9hBiG7H7QfPo1LIwrkI1OpP5Ti/gzJkAlyKmPq8daiaQ= X-Received: by 2002:a63:5b0d:: with SMTP id p13-v6mr13962548pgb.202.1532894530877; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 13:02:10 -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 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> In-Reply-To: From: Rich Freeman Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2018 16:01:59 -0400 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-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Archives-Salt: 4b398390-6f62-4f22-8a5d-c39c11b02bbb X-Archives-Hash: fb78479bc69fec9ace41b1250b9b5e2c On Sun, Jul 29, 2018 at 3:56 PM Matt Turner wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 1:32 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > > > 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. > Why not stick the repos in /var/repos and not /var/db/repos? If we're just making up paths, why not make up a shorter one? I don't think any other linux distros use /var/db... -- Rich