#2731 F36 Change: Relocate RPM database to /usr
Closed: Accepted 6 days ago by churchyard. Opened 18 days ago by bcotton.

Currently, the RPM databases is located in /var. Let's move it to /usr. The move is already under way in rpm-ostree-based installations, and in (open)SUSE.


+1

EDIT (2022-01-14): Reverted my vote to 0 for now. The more I read about it on the list, the less I like this proposal.

+1

EDIT: I think there are real risks with this change, but it's a good cleanup. I would expect some minor breakage in various tools associated with rpm handling, but I hope we can deal with all that as it is discovered. Doing the conversion in an offline-update service should mitigate the risks of the conversion itself.

I commented on the thread. My main concern here is moving the db to /usr, which I do not think is the correct location. I'd like to propose a new top level directory for the distinct category of data we're trying to vacate from /var: /state

Tagging with meeting.

Metadata Update from @dcantrell:
- Issue tagged with: meeting

15 days ago

It would be helpful for me if the "Benefit to Fedora" section had some specific use cases that the change would enable. (e.g. This allows you to build a container like this...) Also, expanding the bullet point with more details about how this change actually helps these specific scenarios would be good:

Is a preparatory step to support boot-to-snapshot and transactional update methods for dealing with problematic updates and upgrades.

Delaying count on this proposal since it is tagged for meeting.

https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2022-01-18/fesco.2022-01-18-18.00.html

FESCo accepts that /usr/lib/sysimage is the de-facto standard between distributions and approves this Change (+5,0,-3)

Metadata Update from @churchyard:
- Issue close_status updated to: Accepted
- Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)

6 days ago

I see there was some discussion and confusion in the meeting regarding upstream acceptance of this thing. This is not to question or object the outcome from my behalf, but since that was a factor in the decision, clarification seems appropriate:

The context for the "2017 discussion" is that it took place in a hurried situation where people had already decided to shove the damn db somewhere under /usr no matter what, had product deadlines to meet, and all I could do was to try and direct the change to something that was beneficial to more than just the snapshots. /usr/lib/sysimage was my suggestion, in that situation. People have since tried to get me to drive the change into Fedora several times, but I've declined because I still think it's not the right thing. As I expressed in the fedora-devel thread.

Login to comment on this ticket.

Metadata