On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 11:17:07AM +0100, Emile van Bergen wrote: > True. The same goes for /mem though, and because it's a bit broader than > /run, I still think it's named more appropriately. "/mem" implies it's going to be in memory, just like "shm" implies it's for shared memory. We don't have /nfs, or /disk. Not that "usr" or "etc" are particularly descriptive, but at least they're not actively misleading. /mem is a great name for something the sysadmin sets up, and then points things at; but it's a bad name for apps to use to get at their data. "/early" perhaps? "/etc/early-var" ? (The latter being a configuration option indicating where to put variable data that's needed early in the boot process; in the form of a symlink) Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <email@example.com> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``Dear Anthony Towns: [...] Congratulations -- you are now certified as a Red Hat Certified Engineer!''
Description: PGP signature