W dniu śro, 11.07.2018 o godzinie 18∶11 -0400, użytkownik Richard Yao
> > On Jul 11, 2018, at 4:43 PM, Rich Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 4:34 PM Richard Yao <r...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > > 
> > > On my system, /usr/portage is a separate mountpoint. There is no need to 
> > > have on,h top level directories be separate mountpoints.
> > 
> > It makes sense to follow FHS.  Sure, I can work around poor designs by
> > sticking mount points all over the place, or manually setting my
> > config to put stuff in sane locations.  It makes more sense to put all
> > the volatile stuff in /var, than to mix it up all over the place and
> > get users to set up separate mountpoints to make up for it.
> Is it a violation of the FHS? /usr is for readonly data and the portage tree 
> is generally readonly, except when being updated. The same is true of 
> everything else in /usr.
> I am confused as to how we only now realized it was a FHS violation when it 
> has been there for ~15 years. I was under the impression that /usr was the 
> correct place for it.
> > 

And we're back to the usual Gentoo argument of 'it was like this for
N years'.  So FYI, something 'being there for ~15 years' doesn't make it
right.  It only means that:

a. Gentoo devs were wrong 15 years ago.

b. Gentoo devs are still wrong today.

c. Gentoo devs can't manage to make such a simple change because they're
too concerned about hurting somebody's feelings about a path.

Best regards,
Michał Górny

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply via email to