www/squid's cache dir
timp87 at gmail.com
Wed Jul 15 14:33:03 UTC 2015
> > 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.
Well, yes, in most cases.
> > 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.
I like the /var/cache/squid/cache variant =) It looks too long though.
About a half of a year cache dir was hided a bit deeper.
Is it your commit? Sorry, I can't see your name, just a name of mail list.
Do you think logs should be under /var/squid too (now empty /var/squid/logs
> Please don't top-post.
I'm sorry! I'll do my best.
Does anyone have any other opinion?
View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/www-squid-s-cache-dir-tp6025127p6025493.html
Sent from the freebsd-ports mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
More information about the freebsd-ports