On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 11:13:18AM -0500, Aaron Griffin wrote:
On 6/19/07, Andrew Fyfe <andrew@neptune-one.net> wrote:
Dan McGee wrote:
On 6/4/07, Andrew Fyfe <andrew@neptune-one.net> wrote:
Default behaviour for 'pacman --root' pacman --root /foobar Root Dir : /foobar DB Path : /foobar/$localstatedir/lib/pacman Cache Dir : /foobar/$localstatedir/cache/pacman/pkg
Lock File : /foobar/$localstatedir/run/pacman.lck Cfg File : /foobar/$sysconfigdir/pacman.conf
This is a reply to the whole email, but I wanted to highlight stuff from above. This is no longer the case- I just eliminated this behavior. Every path is independent of the others. ROOTDIR is *completely* seperate now.
Sorry this is still bugging me, having to type 'pacman -r ... -b ... -c ...' is a pain in the ass. 99% of the time when I'm using 'pacman -r' I want the same fs layout with a different root dir prefix. Am I the only one that uses 'pacman -r' like this most of the time.
I actually might agree with Andrew here. Usually when I use -r, it's like "hey lets install bash in my homedir" or "lets make a chroot dir that I can use later". I want to use everything else the parent system has, as far as cache and configs go.
I dunno, what are all the use cases for using -r? Can someone list a use case where specifying all dirs is common?
I agree, this annoyed me too, I liked being able to just use -r for testing, now I have to use a custom config specifying all paths. However, I think Dan has a valid point that everything should be configurable. This wasn't possible before, was it? So, the question is : how do we make everyone happy ? It's probably possible, we just need to find out how ;) Could we just keep the old behavior, having the path specified in -r prefix all others by default, and this could be overwritten by specifying the other paths?