[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ifupdown writes to /etc... a bug?

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: pgpg4_sOo4yrA.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: