Am Montag, 17. Dezember 2012, 15:56:11 schrieb Diego Elio Pettenò: > On 17/12/2012 15:49, Marc Schiffbauer wrote: > > What about setups where portage tree is mounted via NFS to reduce traffic > > and disk space? > > Since nothing in Gentoo and/or other distributions _enforces_ FHS, > you're allowed to do as you prefer.... > > > FHS states[1] that /var/cache is *locally* generated. Which aould not be > > the case for such setups... > > Again, you can do as you prefer. Do you wish to violate FHS to just keep > in the usual place? You can. You want to move it somewhere else to > adhere to FHS? You can. > > > I prefer /var as well, but I am not such if /var/cache would be the right > > place... > > Any other suggestions on where to place it? And please don't say > /var/lib because that would usually be backed up.
FHS also states: "[...] Other portions may be shared [between systems], notably /var/mail, /var/cache/man, /var/cache/fonts, and /var/spool/news." So I think this might indeed be interpreted like that /var/cache/portage would be perfectly ok. Another place I could imagine is /var/portage because of its fundamental importance in gentoo. FHS about that: "Applications must generally not add directories to the top level of /var. Such directories should only be added if they have some system- wide implication, and in consultation with the FHS mailing list." I think this would also be ok because portage can be counted as "system-wide implication" ... -Marc -- 0x35A64134 - 8AAC 5F46 83B4 DB70 8317 3723 296C 6CCA 35A6 4134
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
