Matthias Klose <d...@ubuntu.com> writes: > On 23.03.2010 02:28, Ben Finney wrote: > > Perhaps also of note is that the FHS recommends systems use > > ‘/var/cache/foo/’ for cached data from applications: > > > > /var/cache : Application cache data > > > > Purpose > > > > /var/cache is intended for cached data from applications. Such data is > > locally generated as a result of time-consuming I/O or calculation. The > > application must be able to regenerate or restore the data. Unlike > > /var/spool, the cached files can be deleted without data loss. The data > > must remain valid between invocations of the application and rebooting > > the system. > > > > > > <URL:http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/fhs/fhs-2.3.html#VARCACHEAPPLICATIONCACHEDATA> > > > > This would suggest that Python could start using ‘/var/cache/python/’ > > for its cached bytecode tree on systems that implement the FHS. > > it reads *data*, not code.
So what? There's no implication that data-which-happens-to-be-code is unsuitable for storage in ‘/var/cache/foo/’. Easily-regenerated Python byte code for caching meets the description quite well, AFAICT. -- \ “It seems intuitively obvious to me, which means that it might | `\ be wrong.” —Chris Torek | _o__) | Ben Finney _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
