On 29 March 2012 07:43, Aaron W. Swenson <titanof...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> So, we're all getting way off topic and discussing reorganizing the > whole enchilada. > > How about we all agree or disagree on the primary point: The Portage > tree doesn't belong in /usr. > +1 > I believe that it does belong under /var/cache/. > > =0 # Not sure , semantically it doesn't make sense as its not behaving as a caching mechanism of any kind and would rather /var/portage or /var/lib/portage or something in that direction over /var/cache . I'd even prefer /var/lib/repositories/portage over /var/cache/portage/ > We can go a bit further and make it /var/cache/gentoo-repos/portage/. > > That way Layman and friends can all make the move there quite simply > without major infrastructure changes. > > The Portage PMS on it's next release would just do a 'mkdir > /var/cache/gentoo-repos/portage/ && sync && rm -rf /usr/portage && > echo "Portage has moved"' on its next 'emerge --sync' while still > looking in both locations for packages. > > I'd rather this change not be automatic, and should be driven by ENV variables, and the new layout be a default layout for new systems, and write an e-news article describing the default change and how to migrate to the new layout for people who want to. -- Kent perl -e "print substr( \"edrgmaM SPA NOcomil.ic\\@tfrken\", \$_ * 3, 3 ) for ( 9,8,0,7,1,6,5,4,3,2 );" http://kent-fredric.fox.geek.nz
