www/squid's cache dir

RW rwmaillists at googlemail.com
Wed Jul 15 14:02:01 UTC 2015

On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 04:25:56 -0700 (MST)
timp wrote:

> Ok, so you don't see the difference too, do you?

Actually I do see the difference - I think the current layout is
better. My point was that "I can't see any difference" isn't a good
argument for making disruptive change.

I think it's obvious that putting multiple caches under one squid
directory is better than having multiple squid directories.

> The point is get rid of dirs which we don't really need for this port,
> and place cache to suitable dir which is made in base system for such
> purposes.
> Just for order. You think it's bad idea?

I think it's cleaner to have a default location for squid caches,
rather than just a default cache location.   There's an unnecessary
directory to the same extent as there is with a single home directory
under /home.  

Whether squid goes under /var or /var/cache is a completely different
issue. In the second case you would need /var/cache/squid/cache.

> 2015-07-15 14:08 GMT+03:00 freebsd-ports mailing list [via FreeBSD]
> <ml-node+s1045724n6025455h90 at n5.nabble.com>:
> > On Tue, 14 Jul 2015 21:39:39 -0700 (MST)
> > timp wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> > Squid can use more than one cache directory, so it makes sense to
> >> > have the default cache directory as a sub-directory of squid/.
> >>
> >> Additional cache dirs can be created manually by user
> >> in /var/squid, I agree. Like /var/squid/cache{1,2,3} etc whatever.
> >> But these dirs can be created manually in /var/cache too. Like
> >> /var/cache/squid{1,2,3}. I can't see any difference.

Please don't top-post.

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list