Re: ifupdown writes to /etc... a bug?
This one time, at band camp, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>Anthony Towns wrote:
>>On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 01:38:53PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>>> I still haven't seen a convincing reason why /run is a preferable
>>> default to /var/run in the majority of cases.=20
>>
>>This is about the namespace, not the storage mechanism. /var is not
>>suitable because while /var is required to allow modifiable files, it's
>>also allowed to be remote. All the scheme proposed to work around this
>>end up being overly complicated and no better than just using /run.
>
>Why is ensuring that /var/run is always a symlink to somewhere writeable
>if /var is unavailable early on overly complicated? You don't want
>/var/run to be shared between multiple hosts anyway, which is the most
>likely case if /var is remote.
Don't do that, keep /run and /var/run separate, just like /tmp and /var/tmp,
/bin and /usr/bin, /lib and /usr/lib.
--
jaq@debian.org http://people.debian.org/~jaq
Reply to: