Re: ifupdown writes to /etc... a bug?
* Thomas Hood <jdthood0@yahoo.co.uk> [030312 00:38]:
> For now I'll continue to
> suggest "/run" but perhaps a better suggestion will come along.
> The argument that it can't be called "/run" because it won't
> be used in exactly the same way as /var/run isn't very
> persuasive.
In what respect would it be other then /var/run. FHS describes
/var/run as
# This directory contains system information data describing the system
# since it was booted. Files under this directory must be cleared (removed
# or truncated as appropriate) at the beginning of the boot process.
# Programs may have a subdirectory of /var/run; this is encouraged for
# programs that use more than one run-time file.
This sounds like the perfect place for things like /etc/mtab and
network-interface-states. The only reason they are not there is
problems with /var not beeing accessible early enough.
Thus describing /run as beeing for filesin /var/run, that need to
be accesible early enough. (Similar like /lib and /bin are described).
This sounds the most reasonable way, and would also allow the admin
to place symlinks /run -> /var/run or /var/run -> /run.
Hochachtungsvoll,
Bernhard R. Link
--
Sendmail is like emacs: A nice operating system, but missing
an editor and a MTA.
Reply to: