Matthew Kennedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Eivind Tagseth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> * Matthew Kennedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-01-15 13:29:45 -0600]: >> >>> Meder Bakirov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >>> For /usr/portage/distfiles, I'm not sure. Since it is essentially >>> architecture independent, I believe the following is appropriate: >>> >>> /usr/portage/distfiles -> /usr/share/portage/distfiles >>> >>> I think the above is in-line with the Linux FHS. >> >> I'd like to see distfiles somewhere under /var. I don't know if it's >> just me, but I don't like distfiles/ to be continually growing with
> [...] > IIRC, thats not very standard -- but what do we care. > /usr/share --> "share" means exactly that -- sharable! It is sharable > because it is only supposed to contain architecture independent stuff. > You should be able to share /usr/share via NFS etc. to other machines, > and I can see that distfiles is a prime candidate for that. Yes, it is sharable, but it is also cache data. So it could go in either /usr/share or /var/cache, except that there are other benefits to putting it on /var, namely fragmentation issues. It is also useful to note that in an environment where /usr/share is actually NFS shared, most likely building of packages is only done on one or several machines, and therefore there is no need for distfiles to be accessible on all machines. -- Jeremy Maitin-Shepard -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
