Re: ifupdown writes to /etc... a bug?
>> On 17 Mar 2003 07:49:22 +0100,
>> Thomas Hood <jdthood0@yahoo.co.uk> said:
> On Mon, 2003-03-17 at 05:38, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> Providing such a guarantee is the point of standardizing on /run
>> (and leaving the implementation details -- physical vs. in-memory
>> -- to the local admin).
> If a consensus is emerging that /run is needed, what's the next
> step? Amending policy to allow for the directory (currently
> forbidden by FHS)?
No, getting a working implementation going and ironing out
the kinks, _then_ amending policy after we get things working
satisfactorily. Policy merely documents current practice; packages
at the bleeding edge can (and should) get ahead of policy while
current practice is being moulded.
manoj
--
"He goes on about the wailing and gnashing of teeth. It comes in one
verse after another, and it is quite manifest to the reader that there
is a certain pleasure in contemplating the wailing and gnashing of
teeth, or else it would not occur so often." Bertrand Russell, "Why I
Am Not a Christian"
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: