On Saturday 05 February 2011 23:52:20 Alan McKinnon wrote: > Apparently, though unproven, at 22:45 on Saturday 05 February 2011, Volker > > Armin Hemmann did opine thusly: > > again, you are starting from a mistaken premise. > > > > /usr/portage makes sense, when you consider its history. It may not be > > the appropriate decision, but with its background it was logical back > > then. > > > > And if something is not broken, don't change it. You do not know what > > old > > tool/setting/whatever might suffocate. > > > > PORTDIR is not a mere workaround. If you are sure that there is no old > > crap lingering around that might expect portdir as /usr/portage, use > > it. > > > > Besides /usr/src/ contains linux and other sources. Wrong too? It is f* > > tradition. portage does not contain temporary data or database stuff - > > that crap is in /var/db, /var/tmp/portage, /var/lib. So the worst stuff > > is somewhere already. > > Tradition on it's own is a lousy idea for retaining anything. > > A tradition worth keeping is one that's worth having because it has use. > However most traditions are merely "but we always did it this way..." > > /usr/portage is a tradition, a hangover from BSD. > LFS is a standard and /usr/portage gets in the way of the standard. > Guess which one should trump the other? > > And the portage tree IS a database. You put (or cause to be put) data into > it, which can be amended, edited, added to or removed, other actors query > the database for information (emerge, eix, etc). The fact that it is > updated on demand and not on the fly, that it is not relational in nature, > that it doesn't have "sql" anywhere in it's name and that it is purely > file-based does not detract in the slightest from the simple fact that the > tree is a database. > > It's just plain outright stupid to have a default location for something > (that by definition is variable) in a place that by definition (or by > de-facto consent) must be mountable read-only and have no ill effects on > the rest of the machine.
and you can mount /usr readonly. You can not update /usr/portage - but so what? You can't install anything with /usr being ro anyway. So the last argument is the weakest. Tradition is a much better reason to keep things the same. You need someone to make the change. Which is more than just move /usr/portage to /var or wherever you want it to be (and first: get consent about where to put it). No, you have to update documentation, make sure that there are not old, broken tools and apps that won't get confused etc pp. As long as nobody steps up to do it - why even bother? Most people don't care about it. Those who do can set PORTDIR wherever they want and can live happily ever after.
