Re: /run vs /var/run
On Mon, 19 Dec 2005, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Dec 19, Gabor Gombas <email@example.com> wrote:
> > If in the future glibc decides to choose some other implementation
> > for shm_open(), then it has no reason to stay.
> But it has no reason to go away either, since there are many other uses
> too for a tmpfs.
Sure, but why do we have to keep using one whose main purpose is something
> > > > /run doesn't especially /need/ to be a tmpfs fs does it? It could
Yes, it does, it needs to always be rw and available very early.
> I understand that some people want a writeable file system available
> before / is mounted rw.
Exactly. I suspect some of the /dev/shm usage would have shifted to /run if
we had it at the time.
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot