On Monday 18 January 2010 19:05:23 Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> /var/empty <-- net-misc/openssh
this isnt exactly openssh specific. a few other packages use it as well for
their users because it's guaranteed to be empty.
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On 01/18/10 01:38, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> On 01/17/10 21:31, Thilo Bangert wrote:
>> /var/layman i dislike due to this sentence in the FHS:
>>
>>"Applications must generally not add directories to the top level of
>> /var. Such directories should only be added if they have some system-wide
> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> isn't a package tree somehow having "system-wide implications"?
> i'm not really sure about /var/db - doesn't seem to be in FHS.
> is a package tree a database?
This depends on your definition of "database". At least some parts of
the tree (li
On Sunday 17 January 2010 15:31:26 Thilo Bangert wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh said:
> > I realise this is a lost cause, but... Repositories are databases, so
> > /var/db/ is your friend.
>
> i like it. Closely followed by /var/lib/layman...
>
> wikipedia says in
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filesy
On 01/17/10 21:31, Thilo Bangert wrote:
> /var/layman i dislike due to this sentence in the FHS:
>
>"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[...]"
isn't a package tree someh
Ciaran McCreesh said:
> I realise this is a lost cause, but... Repositories are databases, so
> /var/db/ is your friend.
>
i like it. Closely followed by /var/lib/layman...
wikipedia says in
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filesystem_Hierarchy_Standard
/var/lib/
State information. Persistent d
On 01/17/10 10:01, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> I realise this is a lost cause, but... Repositories are databases, so
> /var/db/ is your friend.
Right, that's a way you can see it.
Does anyone _strongly_ prefer
/var/db/layman
over
/var/layman
?
Sebastian
Am Samstag 16 Januar 2010 19:26:04 schrieb Sebastian Pipping:
> On 01/16/10 13:56, Ben de Groot wrote:
> >> anybody objecting to /var/layman ?
> >
> > I like that.
>
> it seems that
>
> /var/layman
>
> is the only location nobody has objected to, yet. i plan to go with
> that atm. /var/lib/l
2010/1/15 Sebastian Pipping :
> By default layman currently stores overlays into
>
> /usr/local/portage/layman
>
> (was /usr/portage/local/layman before that).
> As of bug 253725 [1] that's not without problems.
>
> I would like to get it right with the next switch.
I realise this is a lost cause
Ben de Groot dixit (2010-01-16, 00:41):
> 2010/1/15 Dawid Węgliński :
> > On Friday 15 January 2010 20:44:43 Alex Legler wrote:
> >> > /var/lib/layman
> >> >
> >> > do well?
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> > -1, /usr/local/layman?
>
> /usr/local/ is a location the system should avoid. Somewhere in /var/
>
Mike Frysinger dixit (2010-01-15, 20:45):
> On Friday 15 January 2010 20:24:38 Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> > On 01/16/10 00:33, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> > > - From the alternatives, /var/lib/layman doesn't sound right. If
> > > /var/cache/layman doesn't work, what about /var/spool/layman
On 01/16/10 19:31, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> Why not make it a configuration option, with the default as
> /var/layman (or whatever you want)?
It is configurable already (see /etc/layman/layman.cfg)
#---
# Defines the directory where ove
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 11:56 PM, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> it seems that
>
> /var/layman
>
> is the only location nobody has objected to, yet. i plan to go with
> that atm. /var/lib/layman is my second favorite.
>
> again, any objections?
>
Why not make it a configuration option, with the de
On 01/16/10 13:56, Ben de Groot wrote:
>> anybody objecting to /var/layman ?
>
> I like that.
it seems that
/var/layman
is the only location nobody has objected to, yet. i plan to go with
that atm. /var/lib/layman is my second favorite.
again, any objections?
sebastian
On 01/16/10 12:17, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> How about storing it in DISTDIR (like metadata.xml)? Or storing it
> somewhere in the rsync image?
I'm not really sure what you have in mind.
Can you make it a bit more "visual" for me?
Sebastian
On 01/16/10 05:39, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday 15 January 2010 20:55:18 Sebastian Pipping wrote:
>> On 01/16/10 02:45, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> the better idea
>>> though would be to split your stuff along the proper lines.
>>>
>>> cache files = /var/cache/layman/
>>
>> as i said: it's not a
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 01:57:38PM +0100, Ben de Groot wrote:
> 2010/1/16 Peter Volkov :
> > layman cache is nfs distributable. Also it's good idea to have it close
> > to PORTDIR. Thus I'd like to keep it somewhere at /usr.
>
> I'd like both to be under /var/
>
I _use_ both under /var/. In my c
2010/1/16 Peter Volkov :
> layman cache is nfs distributable. Also it's good idea to have it close
> to PORTDIR. Thus I'd like to keep it somewhere at /usr.
I'd like both to be under /var/
Cheers,
--
Ben de Groot
Gentoo Linux developer (qt, media, lxde, desktop-misc)
2010/1/16 Sebastian Pipping :
> On 01/16/10 02:45, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> if you want to keep all of layman's stuff together, then about your only
>> option is to create your own tree at like /var/layman/.
>
> anybody objecting to /var/layman ?
I like that.
--
Ben de Groot
Gentoo Linux develop
El sáb, 16-01-2010 a las 17:16 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan escribió:
> On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 4:41 PM, Lars Wendler wrote:
> >> It's just impossible to choose perfect location that suits all needs and
> >> it should stay user-configurable. So again, do not change this default
> >> we no real need ano
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 4:41 PM, Lars Wendler wrote:
>> It's just impossible to choose perfect location that suits all needs and
>> it should stay user-configurable. So again, do not change this default
>> we no real need another time, please.
>
> /usr/local is a bad choice for an ebuild-generated
On 15-01-2010 20:36:20 +0100, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> I would like to get it right with the next switch.
> Would
>
> /var/lib/layman
>
> do well? /var/cache/layman seems inadequate as it might not be
> regenerated [2] without losses (as upstream moves along).
>
> Would be great to hear a f
> It's just impossible to choose perfect location that suits all needs and
> it should stay user-configurable. So again, do not change this default
> we no real need another time, please.
/usr/local is a bad choice for an ebuild-generated default. Like I said in bug
#253725 I don't want ebuilds
The bug you mentioned [253725] is not about layman location, it's only
about "keepdir" line. Why don't we fix that and don't change defaults
another time? Such change does more harm for our users then good.
В Сбт, 16/01/2010 в 02:55 +0100, Sebastian Pipping пишет:
> On 01/16/10 02:45, Mike Frysing
On Friday 15 January 2010 20:55:18 Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> On 01/16/10 02:45, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > the better idea
> > though would be to split your stuff along the proper lines.
> >
> > cache files = /var/cache/layman/
>
> as i said: it's not a "normal" cache.
you said but didnt explain
On 01/16/10 02:45, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> if you want to keep all of layman's stuff together, then about your only
> option is to create your own tree at like /var/layman/.
anybody objecting to /var/layman ?
> the better idea
> though would be to split your stuff along the proper lines.
>
>
On Friday 15 January 2010 20:24:38 Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> On 01/16/10 00:33, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> > - From the alternatives, /var/lib/layman doesn't sound right. If
> > /var/cache/layman doesn't work, what about /var/spool/layman instead?
>
> Okay, how about
>
> /var/spool/la
On 01/16/10 00:33, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> - From the alternatives, /var/lib/layman doesn't sound right. If
> /var/cache/layman doesn't work, what about /var/spool/layman instead?
Okay, how about
/var/spool/layman
then? Any objections?
Sebastian
> On Fri, 15 Jan 2010, Jorge Manuel B S Vicetto wrote:
> - From the alternatives, /var/lib/layman doesn't sound right.
The FHS (which we don't always obey, but in cases like this it's
useful as a guideline) says about /var/lib: "This hierarchy holds
state information pertaining to an applicat
2010/1/15 Dawid Węgliński :
> On Friday 15 January 2010 20:44:43 Alex Legler wrote:
>> > /var/lib/layman
>> >
>> > do well?
>>
>> +1
>>
> -1, /usr/local/layman?
/usr/local/ is a location the system should avoid. Somewhere in /var/
seems to be the logical place.
Cheers,
--
Ben de Groot
Gentoo L
On Saturday 16 January 2010 00:33:15 Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> On 15-01-2010 21:25, Dawid Węgliński wrote:
> > On Friday 15 January 2010 20:44:43 Alex Legler wrote:
> >>> /var/lib/layman
> >>>
> >>> do well?
> >>
> >> +1
> >
> > -1, /usr/local/layman?
>
> Wouldn't that break the rule t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 15-01-2010 21:25, Dawid Węgliński wrote:
> On Friday 15 January 2010 20:44:43 Alex Legler wrote:
>>> /var/lib/layman
>>>
>>> do well?
>>
>> +1
>>
> -1, /usr/local/layman?
Wouldn't that break the rule that /usr/local is reserved for users / admins
On Friday 15 January 2010 20:44:43 Alex Legler wrote:
> > /var/lib/layman
> >
> > do well?
>
> +1
>
-1, /usr/local/layman?
--
Cheers
Dawid Węgliński
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 20:36:20 +0100, Sebastian Pipping
wrote:
> Would
>
> /var/lib/layman
>
> do well?
+1
--
Alex Legler | Gentoo Security / Ruby
a...@gentoo.org | a...@jabber.ccc.de
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 20:36:20 +0100, Sebastian Pipping
wrote:
> Hello!
>
>
> By default layman currently stores overlays into
>
> /usr/local/portage/layman
>
> (was /usr/portage/local/layman before that).
> As of bug 253725 [1] that's not without problems.
I don't think it should be changed
Hello!
By default layman currently stores overlays into
/usr/local/portage/layman
(was /usr/portage/local/layman before that).
As of bug 253725 [1] that's not without problems.
I would like to get it right with the next switch.
Would
/var/lib/layman
do well? /var/cache/layman seems inad
36 matches
Mail list logo
