Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
Am 24.12.2012 17:09, schrieb Rick Zero_Chaos Farina: On 12/24/2012 09:00 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: On 24/12/2012 14:32, Ulrich Mueller wrote: This doesn't look right to me. /var/spool contains things like printer queues or outgoing mail that are typically deleted after processing. Not sure how /var/cache fits for binpkgs though, tbh. Application cache data. Such data are locally generated as a result of time-consuming I/O or calculation. The application must be able to regenerate or restore the data. The cached files can be deleted without loss of data. No sure how it doesn't... Binpackages are really essentially cache created by portage through time-consuming I/O and calculation (compiling) and can easily be regenerated locally. Plus, you can delete all of this and the system is still functional. Not that I am opposed to keep binpackages in /var/cache - but people on this thread have brought up lot's of reasons why for certain aspects not to keep certain data in certain places. This just hit my mind: can binpackages easily be regenerated locally if their ebuilds are not in portage anymore? I mean they can: grab the ebuild, compile it with the ebuild command, there you go, but isn't that also true for the whole portage tree?
Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: On 24/12/2012 16:43, Ulrich Mueller wrote: Why not? Because they are distributed to other systems? More because they can be used as a backup themselves, if I want to keep older versions available. This is a valid argument, of course. /var/lib then? Fine by me. (Though FHS acolytes would probably put them in /srv ...) Insert a smiley of your choice here. ;-) Let's not get on with /srv right now please. Ulrich
Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
Michael Hampicke wrote: can binpackages easily be regenerated locally if their ebuilds are not in portage anymore? If the package is still installed it is very easy with quickpkg. //Peter
Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012, Sebastian Pipping wrote: On 20.12.2012 19:14, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: The tree is a database. It belongs in /var/db/. I don't see /var/db in the latest release of the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard: http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#THEVARHIERARCHY Wrong standard to choose from. ;-) /var/db/ is already required by the PMS for /var/db/pkg/. I would prefer something that blends with FHS. Is this important for a Gentoo specific directory? /var/db/portage/ PORTDIR /var/db/layman/ layman storage /var/db/pkg/ VDB (no change) /usr/local/portage/ local overlays (no change) /var/cache/distfiles/DISTDIR /var/cache/packages/ PKGDIR Alternatively, the last two could be under /var/cache/portage/{distfiles,packages}/. Ulrich
Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 03:17:06 +0100 Sebastian Pipping sp...@gentoo.org wrote: On 20.12.2012 19:14, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: The tree is a database. It belongs in /var/db/. I don't see /var/db in the latest release of the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard: http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#THEVARHIERARCHY I would prefer something that blends with FHS. That's ok, Gentoo doesn't follow FHS. -- Ciaran McCreesh signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
On 24/12/2012 10:08, Ulrich Mueller wrote: /var/cache/packages/ PKGDIR Maybe /var/spool/binpkgs ? -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 4:08 AM, Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote: On Mon, 24 Dec 2012, Sebastian Pipping wrote: On 20.12.2012 19:14, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: The tree is a database. It belongs in /var/db/. I don't see /var/db in the latest release of the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard: http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#THEVARHIERARCHY Wrong standard to choose from. ;-) /var/db/ is already required by the PMS for /var/db/pkg/. I would prefer something that blends with FHS. Is this important for a Gentoo specific directory? /var/db/portage/ PORTDIR /var/db/layman/ layman storage /var/db/pkg/ VDB (no change) /usr/local/portage/ local overlays (no change) /var/cache/distfiles/DISTDIR /var/cache/packages/ PKGDIR Alternatively, the last two could be under /var/cache/portage/{distfiles,packages}/. Query that's been percolating in my mind...how much of this is specific to Gentoo, and how much has strong overlap with closely related distros like Sabayon and Funtoo? -- :wq
Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 10:08:13 +0100 Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote: On Mon, 24 Dec 2012, Sebastian Pipping wrote: On 20.12.2012 19:14, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: The tree is a database. It belongs in /var/db/. I don't see /var/db in the latest release of the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard: http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#THEVARHIERARCHY Wrong standard to choose from. ;-) /var/db/ is already required by the PMS for /var/db/pkg/. Incorrect. The PMS specifies vdb as being 'unspecified'. The fact that it provides a path there doesn't seem really relevant. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: /var/cache/packages/ PKGDIR Maybe /var/spool/binpkgs ? This doesn't look right to me. /var/spool contains things like printer queues or outgoing mail that are typically deleted after processing. Ulrich
Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
On 24/12/2012 14:32, Ulrich Mueller wrote: This doesn't look right to me. /var/spool contains things like printer queues or outgoing mail that are typically deleted after processing. Not sure how /var/cache fits for binpkgs though, tbh. -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote: On Mon, 24 Dec 2012, Diego Elio Pettenň wrote: /var/cache/packages/ PKGDIR Maybe /var/spool/binpkgs ? This doesn't look right to me. /var/spool contains things like printer queues or outgoing mail that are typically deleted after processing. Then treat it like garbage collection. Some maintenance action could go through and remove the files which aren't fetch-restricted. Portage could do this at the end of its cycle, or it could be set up as a cron job, or it could require a manual maintenance step. -- :wq
Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
Il 24/12/2012 10:11, Ciaran McCreesh ha scritto: On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 03:17:06 +0100 Sebastian Pipping sp...@gentoo.org wrote: On 20.12.2012 19:14, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: The tree is a database. It belongs in /var/db/. yes and no, yes it contain data and executable needed to update gentoo system, in a hierarchical and relational form no, it's a cache of a remote database generally mantained from others. Actually also the difference in importance between /var/db/pkg and //ebuild_tree is very high. Loose the pkg db and your best plan is to re-emerge the entire world, provided you still have a copy of /var/lib/portage/world (or equivalent), loose the latter and have a laugh. To put those in the same category seem risky Not that I personally care since everything gentoo related is kept in /g on my systems, also this for various reason mainly because it's something used to mantain a system and if maintainaince is not needed it's very easy this way to remove. I don't see /var/db in the latest release of the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard: http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#THEVARHIERARCHY I would prefer something that blends with FHS. That's ok, Gentoo doesn't follow FHS. And it's ok to prefere to stay near a standard and use it as a guideline, for various reason, less difference with others and because a bunch of people has already toughted on it, to name just two. Raising to MUST blend would be indeed not beneficial. Regards, Francesco Riosa
Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: On 24/12/2012 14:32, Ulrich Mueller wrote: This doesn't look right to me. /var/spool contains things like printer queues or outgoing mail that are typically deleted after processing. Not sure how /var/cache fits for binpkgs though, tbh. Why not? Because they are distributed to other systems? /var/lib then? (Though FHS acolytes would probably put them in /srv ...) Ulrich
Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 12/24/2012 04:08 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: On Mon, 24 Dec 2012, Sebastian Pipping wrote: On 20.12.2012 19:14, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: The tree is a database. It belongs in /var/db/. I don't see /var/db in the latest release of the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard: http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#THEVARHIERARCHY Wrong standard to choose from. ;-) /var/db/ is already required by the PMS for /var/db/pkg/. I would prefer something that blends with FHS. Is this important for a Gentoo specific directory? /var/db/portage/ PORTDIR /var/db/layman/ layman storage /var/db/pkg/ VDB (no change) /usr/local/portage/ local overlays (no change) /var/cache/distfiles/DISTDIR /var/cache/packages/ PKGDIR Alternatively, the last two could be under /var/cache/portage/{distfiles,packages}/. I am not 100% on this, but I think this is my first +1 for this thread. +1 I really like this layout, it almost makes sense. I won't be bike shedding on this topic (really don't care that much), but I do really like this layout. - -ZC -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJQ2H3/AAoJEKXdFCfdEflKJMwQALbugkzciQpw3KTr32Dwl2p2 TFMRClKv4W006SXjbxLciQg+hLDMPBOIjbCl5UtpWcFSsCWWUXGBJIX7A6m7TZ6N lj4VGjEDBjCKzkp3XypoRXL1XIiuqQpxv3FAqpFbhLczXRP+oQoP3ZmdbDZF4Dky oJf/Pttl4bD8CA6cWZ6tXDvnrZ2w4cJYm/AnuOaCahSM/3MqscWq884lnucbT6Xs IBa6DhNV/iqAXTQ5v/54p6izl6EbV/UJEzFjSVOsPAgmCwVjsc1ZFkZi2BAlt8iv f+8j0SGHRrUXk22nOIe1bwdg7CTpn0cjrYPTjG+sWcx+tEgNzF7xkLLWgeSj4+jL kY7KXvfsmVyamAybySGJNWIjv8n97YkJTy8bT7caIoCB8h0oJvrC2eNRJFISuEjv DpKvql1nNyJJ1/k2aUoBLiUjLpSIGeZ0607W4woTM0mrEo8RGvXGV87y8Y4jGML1 2ks87XcEb/jBPVxCodITwWyB9/aqzC4K0K5rLj5xqIDdeoxb2A8HVefbUEY2mcD/ cFXTl7hnX9KdNl4+VrNSVvNNVR+pZIZz8lT8wiu4wqVwm+CjaY+YPMuGy3ps2cmo Pq3/HbSSQwhP6bEZfZ5md8dZ2p2LSW9xJzhbxmuFCUrLxDAbZTsjDKeJy0q3aHNG Xi+Z+m8PqCDotRD63PWR =lGRB -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 12/24/2012 09:00 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: On 24/12/2012 14:32, Ulrich Mueller wrote: This doesn't look right to me. /var/spool contains things like printer queues or outgoing mail that are typically deleted after processing. Not sure how /var/cache fits for binpkgs though, tbh. Application cache data. Such data are locally generated as a result of time-consuming I/O or calculation. The application must be able to regenerate or restore the data. The cached files can be deleted without loss of data. No sure how it doesn't... Binpackages are really essentially cache created by portage through time-consuming I/O and calculation (compiling) and can easily be regenerated locally. Plus, you can delete all of this and the system is still functional. - -ZC -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJQ2H5HAAoJEKXdFCfdEflKoPEP/14QYZIF/mbquRFkiCnp5KCN s11qw4He6yEsgnjvMKA1CCWZ0R85G/wfVnj0DpcK83zXrP9Znbrk4Yatue/7KXaZ I/sDg5Woo1FT6Mb9EY7hgpawIS25+6xA3eRsPKIlPzBG+i43ZTM4JhDLJeTs1VSH APhkH0EXiA0H8ngCTgP9ReDXoi8KqPbMYGe/t3NVL4KalPdkDsjHeqfUG95C660f TM34UvOGBA4HpySmH+FRdsUxV+9tJtdOZFjSm/oQX5IZrzLQA5lOSHe6t8sQJnsk /b6TYncolfVpUED6y/8072S4GL+mEucf8NFIyMClpDymfILS7zFR0hEawm+UrLjm O2/0ivPHQQA/P4uwTDQzJ1KqHZAgN0lDgbSZYZ5290whypSyJoGIKfVIvSI/qjFR JOy5pCMkY9oClOqZB6s32WowKCzPipT7MPvBgotPuBoHaaMJOeW53FJadi/VEyGc qL6Uv6jn0WKJJpGrONm7LwXnYB8kVzOmqVLpGEIO1mqEX9QL71qsq/Fw1pAyqqB5 NSq1dDbKye9C7nH1xSmhzgGFTs3V+IHKAV2iwjeElhZJF/Iv2+nj/6gONpNI7279 x1Zbi7i3JM1z4EMSaV+Nt60endPeB4KnDFoPXlRLZTlyR2qcLVNVr+qAIWG3m+mM QqQCREx2n/KV/hFUUh5U =7lrq -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
On 24/12/2012 16:43, Ulrich Mueller wrote: Why not? Because they are distributed to other systems? More because they can be used as a backup themselves, if I want to keep older versions available. /var/lib then? Fine by me. (Though FHS acolytes would probably put them in /srv ...) Let's not get on with /srv right now please. -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
On 20.12.2012 19:14, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: The tree is a database. It belongs in /var/db/. I don't see /var/db in the latest release of the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard: http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#THEVARHIERARCHY I would prefer something that blends with FHS. Best, Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
On 20.12.2012 18:27, Ulrich Mueller wrote: Now I wonder: After removal of e.g. the Portage tree from a system, it is generally not possible to restore it. (It can be refetched, but not to its previous state.) Same is true for distfiles, at least to some degree. They may have vanished upstream or from mirrors. Maybe /var/lib would be a better choice? It would also take care of the issue with fetch-restricted files. Thanks for bringing it up. What you address above is the exact reason why Layman's home was moved to /var/lib/layman/ eventually. It has a cache aspect, bit it's not a true cache. Best, Sebastian
[gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
The FHS says: /var/cache is intended for cached data from applications. Such data is locally generated as a result of time-consuming I/O or calculation. The application must be able to regenerate or restore the data. Now I wonder: After removal of e.g. the Portage tree from a system, it is generally not possible to restore it. (It can be refetched, but not to its previous state.) Same is true for distfiles, at least to some degree. They may have vanished upstream or from mirrors. Maybe /var/lib would be a better choice? It would also take care of the issue with fetch-restricted files. Ulrich
Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 20/12/12 12:27 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: The FHS says: /var/cache is intended for cached data from applications. Such data is locally generated as a result of time-consuming I/O or calculation. The application must be able to regenerate or restore the data. Now I wonder: After removal of e.g. the Portage tree from a system, it is generally not possible to restore it. (It can be refetched, but not to its previous state.) Same is true for distfiles, at least to some degree. They may have vanished upstream or from mirrors. Maybe /var/lib would be a better choice? It would also take care of the issue with fetch-restricted files. I had asked more or less the same thing a few days ago. The cases where this would matter are few, however, and those users that need the state preserved could ensure it by including these specific paths in their backups and/or ensuring any cache-cleaner scripts (and AFAIK there aren't any that wouldn't be custom-installed) do not remove them. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlDTUkgACgkQ2ugaI38ACPDgAwEAhFH3Jc8E56WfePr3W1396+Jk 65q7X8eEwNAYr8eJLwQA/1Xi7E42004M3frMDCDDBVZeD1EYmKkvXA8POhQUZc36 =JMod -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 18:27 +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote: The FHS says: /var/cache is intended for cached data from applications. Such data is locally generated as a result of time-consuming I/O or calculation. The application must be able to regenerate or restore the data. Now I wonder: After removal of e.g. the Portage tree from a system, it is generally not possible to restore it. (It can be refetched, but not to its previous state.) Same is true for distfiles, at least to some degree. They may have vanished upstream or from mirrors. Maybe /var/lib would be a better choice? It would also take care of the issue with fetch-restricted files. Due to fetch-restricted files, /var/lib does make sense for distfiles. And of course /var/lib should be used for the default personal overlay (currently in /usr/local/portage). But I think that the main portage and overlay checkouts are already cache-like in the sense that any manual user changes are automatically overwritten by emerge --sync / layman -S, which the users are supposed to run on a sufficiently regular basis. So /var/cache does seem like a reasonable place for them.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
On Thu, 20 Dec 2012, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: On 20/12/12 12:27 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: The FHS says: /var/cache is intended for cached data from applications. Such data is locally generated as a result of time-consuming I/O or calculation. The application must be able to regenerate or restore the data. Now I wonder: After removal of e.g. the Portage tree from a system, it is generally not possible to restore it. (It can be refetched, but not to its previous state.) Same is true for distfiles, at least to some degree. They may have vanished upstream or from mirrors. Maybe /var/lib would be a better choice? It would also take care of the issue with fetch-restricted files. I had asked more or less the same thing a few days ago. The cases where this would matter are few, however, and those users that need the state preserved could ensure it by including these specific paths in their backups and/or ensuring any cache-cleaner scripts (and AFAIK there aren't any that wouldn't be custom-installed) do not remove them. What about /usr/portage/licenses, for example? Some of the licenses are required to be present on the system if the corresponding software is installed. So users cannot legally remove them. Should we really put them under /var/cache which suggests that everything in there can be wiped? Ulrich
Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 18:27:26 +0100 Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote: The FHS says: /var/cache is intended for cached data from applications. Such data is locally generated as a result of time-consuming I/O or calculation. The application must be able to regenerate or restore the data. Now I wonder: After removal of e.g. the Portage tree from a system, it is generally not possible to restore it. (It can be refetched, but not to its previous state.) Same is true for distfiles, at least to some degree. They may have vanished upstream or from mirrors. Maybe /var/lib would be a better choice? It would also take care of the issue with fetch-restricted files. The tree is a database. It belongs in /var/db/. -- Ciaran McCreesh signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 12/20/2012 01:14 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 18:27:26 +0100 Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote: The FHS says: /var/cache is intended for cached data from applications. Such data is locally generated as a result of time-consuming I/O or calculation. The application must be able to regenerate or restore the data. Now I wonder: After removal of e.g. the Portage tree from a system, it is generally not possible to restore it. (It can be refetched, but not to its previous state.) Same is true for distfiles, at least to some degree. They may have vanished upstream or from mirrors. Maybe /var/lib would be a better choice? It would also take care of the issue with fetch-restricted files. The tree is a database. It belongs in /var/db/. +1 and another +1 from my other personality, so +2 from us - -ZC -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJQ03oTAAoJEKXdFCfdEflKKLYQAIJRRlt3xnh30rxbVi3T7Iuy tcx853ngIoyhc8fuhygDdsWPaIwa2WqOBuM6SuxiRlj3BDuL3sgSpMX3bWaL2ukK VXRJKZ2zVBOdc/KfbBvkWjN3P9nlOMMV8HGtGgwlniLF6BeeKlI2SqI8tWRX5bBN eUDbb1I0gSV1Tr1F3s9j5GSjd+kq17DloeXD4W0/uOEnN9Q+dvh8zMRA208ZY7qj B0f7TMgkh1ryy1OPSeXDlwgIjJbzgHWoDXN7RPiN/WF/E4msea/oq3tgz6TdTtdN sg+9VqqVXmJwHeMSpiQbR13JJ/I1pt+y9j8KgkUU5SGedyNYrzvaaSsy+ENdmVU2 JyEX5U+dFIgEo3uZX55fStGJyMWDoV5PmDkSUzDNyC2t1kgROYRh8JokGukqY3tL VKeFKwqysRmJfeLuFYbgsXezrQQrGD1PWsPt9yLoS5hFER89+A95d8f00tTv8mCe KAihOScCwtxl1PHfkOwB4BZJwdilwXBoKaAgT91Ul43GGabxYOMpCKfq2w9dzDT/ oMWPUrwIgJT/kdmBm2+TaLfwEfVHUCOhPaD5vqBeYJ2MJhZWr23VRlR5YUEf7E9W S+yBSiLkr2ZCVv3sZ80tRezN6FVZRKSJjIeZ11u7AWXN3hxtbvidJV+yL416/nJr 4rD8jfLJHHOvVaiX36JH =MnSP -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?
Ulrich Mueller schrieb: Now I wonder: After removal of e.g. the Portage tree from a system, it is generally not possible to restore it. (It can be refetched, but not to its previous state.) Is it required that the _exact_ _same_ _data_ will be regenerated? This is not the case with most users of /var/cache (like ccache for example). They only regenerate what is needed so the application continues to work properly. The ebuilds that are needed for portage functioning are saved to /var/db/pkg already. squid cache would be another example, or just about every other Linux distro's package manager. What about /usr/portage/licenses, for example? Some of the licenses are required to be present on the system if the corresponding software is installed. So users cannot legally remove them. They are not required for functioning of the system, and a sync will restore them. Should we really put them under /var/cache which suggests that everything in there can be wiped? Yes. Best regards, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn