Re: ifupdown writes to /etc... a bug?
Thomas Viehmann wrote:
> Steve Langasek wrote:
> > But while I disagree with your arguments and felt they warranted a
> > rebuttal, for reasons previously explained I do not oppose moving forward
> > with an /etc/volatile or /etc/run directory as an interim solution.
> I think this is the key paragraph here, as well as Thomas' (^H^H
> Hood's) main point.
> Maybe the justification should just be "Things that ended up in etc
> for historic reasons but which should be in something ending in run".
> As Thomas and yourself have pointed out, it's a interim solution and
> One might add that it's probably a better starting point to do start
> FHS lobbying for /run than the present situation by clearly pointing
> out the scope and proving feasibility.
Exactly. Personnaly I am neutral about the directory but I want things
to move on instead of getting stalled. Thomas Hood proposal seems the
most reasonnable compromise so far.
It is a bit a Condorcet vote situation with the ballot
A [ ] /run
B [ ] /etc/run
C [ ] do nothing
Steve has say he would vote ABC, I would probably vote BAC,
but what is important is to me is to defeat the C option.