Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: moving default location of portage tree

[Richard Yao]

> On Jul 11, 2018, at 11:56 AM, Rich Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 11:36 AM Raymond Jennings <shent...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> I do think it would be a wise idea to "grandfather" the current layout
>> for awhile.
>> 
> 
> I don't see why we would ever stop supporting it, at least in general.
> Maybe if some day somebody had a solution for a read-only /usr with
> signature checking that might require portage to be mounted elsewhere,
> but I don't ever see that becoming the default.
> 
> Portage just looks for the repository where you tell it to.  If you
> tell it that the repository is in /var, it will use it.  If you put it
> in /tmp, that's fine too.
> 
> This is just about the default, which should follow FHS.  The case of
> separate mounts is exactly why /usr is a bad spot - the access
> patterns for something like the repository have far more in common
> with /var than /usr.

On my system, /usr/portage is a separate mountpoint. There is no need to have 
on,h top level directories be separate mountpoints.
> 
> -- 
> Rich
>