From simon.mar2018 at a-oben.org Tue Mar 20 09:01:37 2018 From: simon.mar2018 at a-oben.org (Simon Friedberger) Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 10:01:37 +0100 Subject: [fhs-discuss] Backup excluded folders Message-ID: I think given how many package managers are popping up it might be nice to have a specification on where to put files which are essentially just cached. This would allow simple exclusion from backups and potential greps or finds. Is this something that might be included in a future version? Best Regards, Simon From eagle at eyrie.org Wed Mar 21 01:39:52 2018 From: eagle at eyrie.org (Russ Allbery) Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 18:39:52 -0700 Subject: [fhs-discuss] Backup excluded folders In-Reply-To: (Simon Friedberger's message of "Tue, 20 Mar 2018 10:01:37 +0100") References: Message-ID: <87muz2rytz.fsf@hope.eyrie.org> Simon Friedberger writes: > I think given how many package managers are popping up it might be nice > to have a specification on where to put files which are essentially just > cached. This would allow simple exclusion from backups and potential > greps or finds. > Is this something that might be included in a future version? Is this not /var/cache, which is already in the specification? -- Russ Allbery (eagle at eyrie.org) From ralph at inputplus.co.uk Wed Mar 21 11:23:25 2018 From: ralph at inputplus.co.uk (Ralph Corderoy) Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2018 11:23:25 +0000 Subject: [fhs-discuss] Backup excluded folders In-Reply-To: <87muz2rytz.fsf@hope.eyrie.org> References: <87muz2rytz.fsf@hope.eyrie.org> Message-ID: <20180321112325.C281D1F936@orac.inputplus.co.uk> Hi Russ, > Simon Friedberger writes: > > I think given how many package managers are popping up it might be > > nice to have a specification on where to put files which are > > essentially just cached. This would allow simple exclusion from > > backups and potential greps or finds. > > > Is this something that might be included in a future version? > > Is this not /var/cache, which is already in the specification? Perhaps Simon is thinking of package managers run by a user for just their environment, e.g. Go's `vgo' is caching libraries of external Go source as zip files now. CACHEDIR.TAG, defined by http://www.brynosaurus.com/cachedir/spec.html, and used by GNU tar, etc., is related. -- Cheers, Ralph. https://plus.google.com/+RalphCorderoy From eagle at eyrie.org Wed Mar 21 19:27:24 2018 From: eagle at eyrie.org (Russ Allbery) Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2018 12:27:24 -0700 Subject: [fhs-discuss] Backup excluded folders In-Reply-To: <20180321112325.C281D1F936@orac.inputplus.co.uk> (Ralph Corderoy's message of "Wed, 21 Mar 2018 11:23:25 +0000") References: <87muz2rytz.fsf@hope.eyrie.org> <20180321112325.C281D1F936@orac.inputplus.co.uk> Message-ID: <87po3xfcv7.fsf@hope.eyrie.org> Ralph Corderoy writes: > Perhaps Simon is thinking of package managers run by a user for just > their environment, e.g. Go's `vgo' is caching libraries of external Go > source as zip files now. CACHEDIR.TAG, defined by > http://www.brynosaurus.com/cachedir/spec.html, and used by GNU tar, > etc., is related. For software run by interactive users, these days I would tend to just follow the XDG specification. It's pretty widely adopted at this point and there seems to be slow movement towards it for most interactive software. https://specifications.freedesktop.org/basedir-spec/basedir-spec-latest.html This specifies $XDG_CACHE_HOME, falling back on $HOME/.cache if not set. -- Russ Allbery (eagle at eyrie.org) From ralph at inputplus.co.uk Thu Mar 22 10:05:51 2018 From: ralph at inputplus.co.uk (Ralph Corderoy) Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 10:05:51 +0000 Subject: [fhs-discuss] Backup excluded folders In-Reply-To: <87po3xfcv7.fsf@hope.eyrie.org> References: <87muz2rytz.fsf@hope.eyrie.org> <20180321112325.C281D1F936@orac.inputplus.co.uk> <87po3xfcv7.fsf@hope.eyrie.org> Message-ID: <20180322100551.70EEB208E9@orac.inputplus.co.uk> Hi Russ, > For software run by interactive users, these days I would tend to just > follow the XDG specification. It's pretty widely adopted at this > point and there seems to be slow movement towards it for most > interactive software. > > https://specifications.freedesktop.org/basedir-spec/basedir-spec-latest.html > > This specifies $XDG_CACHE_HOME, falling back on $HOME/.cache if not > set. They aren't necessarily interactive users, it isn't desktop software creating the cache material that backups should skip. $XDG_CACHE_HOME won't be used by them. It's lower level than XDG, more like FHS. :-) -- Cheers, Ralph. https://plus.google.com/+RalphCorderoy From eagle at eyrie.org Thu Mar 22 20:54:40 2018 From: eagle at eyrie.org (Russ Allbery) Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 13:54:40 -0700 Subject: [fhs-discuss] Backup excluded folders In-Reply-To: <20180322100551.70EEB208E9@orac.inputplus.co.uk> (Ralph Corderoy's message of "Thu, 22 Mar 2018 10:05:51 +0000") References: <87muz2rytz.fsf@hope.eyrie.org> <20180321112325.C281D1F936@orac.inputplus.co.uk> <87po3xfcv7.fsf@hope.eyrie.org> <20180322100551.70EEB208E9@orac.inputplus.co.uk> Message-ID: <87bmffompb.fsf@hope.eyrie.org> Ralph Corderoy writes: >> For software run by interactive users, these days I would tend to just >> follow the XDG specification. It's pretty widely adopted at this >> point and there seems to be slow movement towards it for most >> interactive software. >> >> https://specifications.freedesktop.org/basedir-spec/basedir-spec-latest.html >> >> This specifies $XDG_CACHE_HOME, falling back on $HOME/.cache if not >> set. > They aren't necessarily interactive users, it isn't desktop software > creating the cache material that backups should skip. $XDG_CACHE_HOME > won't be used by them. It's lower level than XDG, more like FHS. :-) Right, so the question is whether there's some unfilled design space between /var/cache and $XDG_CACHE_HOME. I personally don't see it, but that may just be a failure of my imagination? -- Russ Allbery (eagle at eyrie.org)