Move /usr/sup to /var/db/sup?

[Garance A Drosihn]

At 12:36 PM -0700 5/21/04, 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.

I have all my own sup-files anyway, so I do not have any
strong opinion on this.  But there is one minor advantage
that I have noticed in having the "base=" directory in the
same partition as the "prefix=" directory.  If the partition
matching "prefix=" is not mounted, and if the "base=" file
is on that partition, then any attempt to run the cvsup will
immediately fail.

However, if the "prefix=" partition is not mounted, and the
"base=" directory *is* available (because it is on a different
partition), then the cvsup will go right ahead and download
everything into the wrong partition.  Depending on how your
machine is set up, this can be rather disastrous...  (it was
for me, at least!)

I have no idea if that is why someone went with /usr/sup in
the example supfiles, though.  I do not object to making the
change to use /var/db/sup, but then I don't use those example
files so my vote wouldn't mean much anyway...  :-)

-- 
Garance Alistair Drosehn            =   gad at gilead.netel.rpi.edu
Senior Systems Programmer           or  gad at freebsd.org
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute    or  drosih at rpi.edu