On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 03:24:58PM +0100, Thomas Hood wrote: > On Wed, 2003-03-12 at 14:30, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote: > > - need shared memory? use /dev/shm > > - need to put info somewhere that doesn't have to be kept between > > boots? /var/run > > - same but need it before /var is mounted? /run > > - same but need it even when / is read-only ? /run, setup by the > > sysadmin to be on a tmpfs > Are there any objections to symlinking /var/run to /run > (unless /var/run is already a rw, persistent, and non-network- > mounted directory)? On your system? None. As part of the system distributed by Debian? Plenty. There's no guarantee that all the data in /var/run is small, so this could be a problem for some people. This may be acceptable for new installs, but we certainly shouldn't be munging on upgrade to do this. > Advantages: > * One path /var/run to all runtime state files -- no need to > attend to how early in the boot sequence the file is used Putting all libs in /lib or all binaries in /bin would have the same advantage, but we don't do that either. > * No need to move files currently in /var/run to /run There's no need for that anyway. If they're currently in /var/run, then they're clearly not needed before /var is mounted, so they can stay where they are. > * No need to amend FHS I think there's still a need to amend the FHS. The applications that need a /run before /var is mounted will still have to use /run as their path instead of /var/run; these applications will not conform to the FHS unless the FHS is amended to include /run. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgpeFJpVYTPKq.pgp
Description: PGP signature