From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 11 17:58:27 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: arch@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7D6D16A468 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2007 17:58:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from quetzal@zone3000.net) Received: from mx1.sitevalley.com (sitevalley.com [209.67.60.43]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5975713C4AE for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2007 17:58:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from quetzal@zone3000.net) Received: from zone3000.kharkov.ua (HELO localhost) (217.144.69.37) by 0 with SMTP; 11 Jun 2007 17:31:45 -0000 Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 20:31:48 +0300 From: Nikolay Pavlov To: Andrew Lankford Message-ID: <20070611173148.GC36573@zone3000.net> References: <466B78E6.5060201@charter.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <466B78E6.5060201@charter.net> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE-p4 User-Agent: mutt-ng/devel-r804 (FreeBSD) Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Bikeshed: Moving around the var/db/pkg hierarchy X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 17:58:27 -0000 On Sunday, 10 June 2007 at 0:07:02 -0400, Andrew Lankford wrote: > Just wondering, but what are the reasons for putting port building options and package system meta data in the /var slice? Maybe I'm just not the sort of FreeBSD user who would > see a need to reserve a gigabyte or more for the /var partition, but /var/db/pkg keeps getting larger over successive upgrades even though the rest of /var really doesn't > (assuming that programs don't dump all sorts of unclaimed rubbish in /var/tmp). Why not place ports/package info in the same part of the tree where package files typically go, > /usr/local? > > Andrew Lankford > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" This is because on the large environments the ports tree is usually mounted from the NFS repository on every other server. The much better question is why portupgrade is using /usr/ports directory by default. # ENV['PORTSDIR'] ||= '/usr/ports' # ENV['PORTS_INDEX'] ||= ENV['PORTSDIR'] + '/INDEX' # ENV['PORTS_DBDIR'] ||= ENV['PORTSDIR'] # ENV['PKG_DBDIR'] ||= '/var/db/pkg' I think the more consistent way is ENV['PORTS_DBDIR'] ||= '/var/db/ports' However this is just IMHO. -- ====================================================================== - Best regards, Nikolay Pavlov. <<<----------------------------------- ======================================================================