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

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



On Sun, Mar 23, 2003 at 12:27:54AM +0100, Russell Coker wrote:
> > Is it a lot of work to implement /run?
> If it was not a lot of work then it would have been done without such a long 
> discussion.

What makes you think that?

Implementing /run means having some packages make the directory, and
pointing the handful of packages that write to /etc at /run instead. Other
complications, like letting /run be an in-memory fs or something are
easily handled by the admin.

> Things to do:
> 1)  Change programs such as mount.

s,/etc/,/run/,g

> 2)  Solve issues of supporting different kernels (2.2.x doesn't have tmpfs).

tmpfs isn't required: you can just use a local partition, or, if your /
is rw, leave it on /. This is easily left to the admin.

> 3)  Convince the FHS people (as if that's ever going to happen).

This can't possibly happen until after we've started using /run, so isn't
relevant.

> 4)  Change all applications that write to /etc and put in sym-links for 
> applications that read from it (*).

See (1).

> (*)  A short list for 4 is:
> mount
> sendmail daemon
> sendmail -t run by the user for some mail servers
> Various daemon start scripts.
> ntpd
> hotplug
> passwd/chfn/chsh/etc
> useradd/userdel/etc
> samba
> Some file system administrative programs.

Eh? passwd and useradd are part of the admin's toolset; if they need
to write to /etc (rather than using ldap or similar), the admin needs
to remount / rw. This is exactly the same as needing to mount / rw when
running apt-get and dpkg.

> The problems don't end here however.  

Oh, no, the sky is falling!

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <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!''

Attachment: pgpxd4HqYy8xC.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: