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

Re: /run vs. /lib/run

Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 08:45:45PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > > (TBH, I'd be much happier just making the technical changes
> > > necessary to ensure /var is mounted early -- keeps the
> > > filesystem sane, and it's just a simple matter of programming,
> > > rather than arguing over what's ugly.
> > Yeah, I agree with this too.
> So why don't we go with this? Thomas?

The proposal looks like it could work.  I would take the proposal,
simplify it (it can be made more complex later if there is a need for
more flexibility), and carry it out in at least two steps.

To simplify the first step we take the "early run fs" which is needed
in some cases, mount it unconditionally with a fixed fs type and at a
fixed location.  This alone will be useful for several purposes.

Bind-mounting this directory under /var/run in a race-free manner can
be implemented in a second stage.  Someone should submit a wish
report and provide a patch, plus testimony from maintainers who need
this enhancement and the reasons why they must be able to write to 
/var/run/, per se, so early.
Thomas Hood  ;)

Reply to: