On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 00:22:34 +0200 Alan McKinnon <alan.mckin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 13/08/2015 00:21, James Le Cuirot wrote: > > On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 00:11:45 +0200 > > Alan McKinnon <alan.mckin...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On 12/08/2015 23:29, James Le Cuirot wrote: > >>> Mike Frysinger <vapier <at> gentoo.org> writes: > >>>> > >>>> On 10 Aug 2015 09:17, Michał Górny wrote: > >>>>> Dnia 2015-08-10, o godz. 02:42:21 Mike Frysinger napisał(a): > >>>>>> On 10 Aug 2015 08:28, Justin (jlec) wrote: > >>>>>>> I like to propose to add the md5-cache into it. Which other > >>>>>>> files are of interest? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> /distfiles/ > >>>>>> /local/ > >>>>>> /packages/ > >>>>> > >>>>> Those directories should not be ignored. Those should not exist > >>>>> for a long time. > >>>> > >>>> there's no reason people can't use these on their own system. > >>>> there's no reason they should be added to the git repo which > >>>> means, if a user opted to utilize them, they should be ignored. > >>> > >>> I agree and I'm not sure what mgorny is basing his statement on > >>> anyway. Apart from /local/, which I forget the purpose of, the > >>> default locations for DISTDIR and PKGDIR still seem to > >>> be /usr/portage/distfiles and /usr/portage/packages. I must admit > >>> that I'm struggling to find the logic for this in Portage but > >>> those are the defaults nonetheless. So why would they not exist? > >>> I'm certainly using them here and I would like to see them > >>> in .gitignore. > >> > >> /usr/portage/local was the original location for the user's own > >> personal ebuild space - an "overlay" if you will. > >> /usr/portage/distfiles and /usr/portage/packages are there because > >> that's where ports has put them for decades, and no-one has gotten > >> around to changing it in portage yet. FreeBSD defines the use > >> of /usr very differently to what Linux users are used to. > >> > >> Those dirs really should be in /var/portage, and the user's overlay > >> has no business being under main tree itself > > > > I didn't say they were the most appropriate locations and I agree > > that /var/portage is best but that doesn't change the fact that they > > are still the defaults. :) > > > > Indeed. And it's equally true they should be git ignored. > > > > Two things... 1) /var/portage is ABSOLUTELY the wrong name. with teh move which should happen soon, it will be named gentoo just like the repo name. The final location path is not yet 100% set and will not likely come to any agreement amongst the populous. It hasn't yet ;) But is will end up somewhere in /var/.../repos/gentoo most likely. The MAIN reason, is there is often too much confusion between portage the package manager and portage the "gentoo" ebuild tree. So to follow the overlay naming rules for inclusion in the repositories.xml file, the directory name must be the same as the repo name. 2) There is another alternate location that you can define files to ignore locally without having to commit them to .gitignore. Consider .gitignore a global setting. There is another setting inside .git/info/exclude which is a local config file that will persist and not be affected by pulls. So please use that for local exclusions you want to add and not try to force them into a global .gitignore which is part of the repo. Something that seems to be hotly debated. ;) -- Brian Dolbec <dolsen>
