Re: /etc not on / (was Re: possible mass-filing of bugs: many shared library packages contain binaries in usr/bin)
On Mon, 20 May 2002 13:42, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Mon, 20 May 2002, Russell Coker wrote:
> > On Mon, 13 May 2002 06:13, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
> > > Wouter Verhelst <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > > > OK, how about this one then: How can init start initscripts if
> > > > /etc/inittab is not on /? Not to mention the fact that your hardcoded
> > > > initscript usually resides in /etc too.
> > > >
> > > > Pretty hard that way, huh?
> > >
> > > One way to do it would be to have a skeleton /etc on /; when the real
> > > /etc is mounted it'll supplant the skeleton. Another way would be to
> > > have the init invoked by the kernel be a script or program that
> > > mounted /etc before exec'ing the real init.
> > If you're going to do that then have /base-etc contain the files and /etc
> > have sym-links. You don't want to umount /etc on a live system to change
> > some boot script...
> dpkg has issues with symlinks and conffiles.
When /etc (and presumably all other file systems including /home and /var)
are not mounted you are unlikely to want to run dpkg...
When /etc is mounted the symlinks will be hidden.
If you send email to me or to a mailing list that I use which has >4 lines
of legalistic junk at the end then you are specifically authorizing me to do
whatever I wish with the message and all other messages from your domain, by
posting the message you agree that your long legalistic sig is void.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org