Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 2/2] Update /usr/portage references (bug 378603)

[Brian Dolbec <dolsen@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3501 bytes --]

On Sun, 5 Aug 2018 22:46:58 -0700
Zac Medico <zmedico@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On 08/05/2018 09:59 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> >>>>>> On Sun, 5 Aug 2018, Zac Medico wrote:  
> >   
> >> --- a/cnf/make.conf.example
> >> +++ b/cnf/make.conf.example
> >> [...]  
> >   
> >> @@ -119,16 +119,16 @@
> >>  #     fetched on demand for a given build. If you would like to
> >>  #     selectively prune obsolete files from this directory, see
> >>  #     eclean from the gentoolkit package. Note that locations
> >> under -#     /usr/portage are not necessarily safe for data
> >> storage. See the +#     /var/db/repos/gentoo are not necessarily
> >> safe for data storage. See the #     PORTDIR documentation for
> >> more information. -#DISTDIR=/usr/portage/distfiles
> >> +#DISTDIR=/var/db/repos/gentoo/distfiles  
> > 
> > Shouldn't this be /var/cache/distfiles ...
> >   
> >>  #
> >>  # PKGDIR is the location of binary packages that you can have
> >> created #     with '--buildpkg' or '-b' while emerging a package.
> >> This can get #     up to several hundred megs, or even a few gigs.
> >> Note that -#     locations under /usr/portage are not necessarily
> >> safe for data +#     locations under /var/db/repos/gentoo are not
> >> necessarily safe for data #     storage. See the PORTDIR
> >> documentation for more information. -#PKGDIR=/usr/portage/packages
> >> +#PKGDIR=/var/db/repos/gentoo/packages  
> > 
> > ... and /var/cache/binpkgs?  
> 
> Thanks, I've fixed the /var/cache/{distfiles,binpkgs} locations in v2.
> 
> >> --- a/lib/portage/cache/flat_hash.py
> >> +++ b/lib/portage/cache/flat_hash.py
> >> @@ -144,7 +144,7 @@ class database(fs_template.FsBased):
> >>  					# Only recurse 1 deep, in
> >> order to avoid iteration over # entries from another nested cache
> >> instance. This can # happen if the user nests an overlay inside
> >> -					# /usr/portage/local as
> >> in bug #302764.
> >> +
> >> # /var/db/repos/gentoo/local as in bug #302764.  
> > 
> > Shouldn't a local overlay be in /var/db/repos/local, but never
> > inside of the gentoo repo?  
> 
> Yes, but for a long time /usr/local/portage was somewhat standard, in
> fact it's still mentioned here:
> 
> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Custom_repository
> 
> Nowadays, repository verification will prevent that from working...
> 

But that too can be changed along with all the user install
documentation which will need to be updated as well.  The new
recomended location should be /var/db/repos/local.  I will be updating
layman for /var/db/repos/... as well.  That is the intention of the
"repos/" subdir.

All these changes as well as the catlayst changes need to be
co-ordinated so that snapshots and portage and stages don't precede the
docs changes.


> >> --- a/man/make.conf.5
> >> +++ b/man/make.conf.5
> >> @@ -219,10 +219,10 @@ Use the \fBPORTAGE_RO_DISTDIRS\fR variable
> >> to specify one or more read-only directories containing distfiles.
> >>  
> >>  Note
> >> -that locations under /usr/portage are not necessarily safe for
> >> data storage. +that locations under /var/db/repos/gentoo are not
> >> necessarily safe for data storage.  
> > 
> > IMHO this statement should be made much stronger.  
> 
> Yes, we could also say something about repository verification here.
> The old defaults set a really bad example, so we needed statements
> like this to steer people in the right direction.
> --
> Thanks,
> Zac
> 


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 981 bytes --]