** On Apr 04, GOTO Masanori scribbled: > At Mon, 3 Apr 2000 13:41:03 -0700, > Lawrence Walton <lawrence@the-penguin.otak.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 08:55:48PM +0200, Grendel wrote: > > > ** On Apr 03, Tom Lees scribbled: > > > > > > > > sure than at some point, after potato is released, people will try to use > > > > > 2.4.x and some of them can face problems when their applications won't be > > > > > able to use the shared memory. > > The real question is where should we mount shm. > > Even L.K. Seems divided, on that question. > > Some think /var/shm, others /dev/shm, and still others /shm. > > I think /shm is the simplest least intrusive. > > /dev/shm is not good place. Discussed on Linux Kernel Lists > past a few months before; if we mounted devfs and tried to umount, > it might fail. > > IMHO, /var/shm is the best place to mount the shmfs. It's the only place. 2.3.99pre2 used to have a procfs entry that specified the mountpoint, it doesn't have it anymore AFAIK (didn't compile >2.3.99pre2 yet) - the mountpoint is /var/shm. marek
Attachment:
pgpAABQNtEbvY.pgp
Description: PGP signature