From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Sat May 22 02:16:33 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BAA816A4CE; Sat, 22 May 2004 02:16:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.nsu.ru (mx.nsu.ru [212.192.164.5]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 146D543D2D; Sat, 22 May 2004 02:16:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from danfe@regency.nsu.ru) Received: from regency.nsu.ru ([193.124.210.26]) by mx.nsu.ru with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1BRSlr-0004De-Ce; Sat, 22 May 2004 16:26:23 +0700 Received: from regency.nsu.ru (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by regency.nsu.ru (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i4M9IMAT053216; Sat, 22 May 2004 16:18:22 +0700 (NOVST) (envelope-from danfe@regency.nsu.ru) Received: (from danfe@localhost) by regency.nsu.ru (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i4M9IMeu053182; Sat, 22 May 2004 16:18:22 +0700 (NOVST) (envelope-from danfe) Date: Sat, 22 May 2004 16:18:22 +0700 From: Alexey Dokuchaev To: "Crist J. Clark" Message-ID: <20040522091822.GA50435@regency.nsu.ru> References: <20040521193605.GA8246@blossom.cjclark.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040521193605.GA8246@blossom.cjclark.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Move /usr/sup to /var/db/sup? X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 May 2004 09:16:33 -0000 On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 12:36:05PM -0700, Crist J. Clark wrote: > Just a minor thing, but I would think[0] most people would agree that > /var/db/sup is a much more logical place for the CVSup "base" directory > than /usr/sup. Yes, it doesn't take up much space on /usr, but for > those who don't want to write to /usr[1] too much or mount /usr read- > only, it's an irritant. > > Of course, there is one big reason not to change it, because it would > be a change. FWIW, compatibility symlink can hang in there for a while (until 6.0 maybe). ./danfe