On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 09:58:58PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Apr 2011, Roger Leigh wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 08:59:01PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > > On Fri, 15 Apr 2011, Roger Leigh wrote:
> > > > { find var/run/ ! -type d -print0; \
> > > > find var/lock/ ! -type d -print0; } | xargs -0r $_CHROOT_SH rm
> > > >
> > > > I'm afraid this will need fixing in util-vserver(?) though. We can't
> > > > work around this in initscripts postinst, I'm afraid, since it worked
> > > > correctly, and this happened after the migration.
> > >
> > > The proper fix would be to use bind mounts, or always use multiple tmpfs
> > > (which is safer, anyway).
> >
> > We have now fixed this issue by never moving /var/run or /var/lock
> > in postinst. In the case of a chroot/vserver, we simply create a
> > symlink from the new location (/run) to the old (/var/run) so that
> > both paths are functional. In consequence, /var/run and /var/lock
> > will remain directories in a vserver environment.
>
> Now, scripts that work outside of vservers and want /run might croak when
> run inside a vserver.
Only if the symlink says "/run". If it leads to "../run", an outside script
will still work.
The last version I tested produced absolute ones, it might be better to make
them relative.
--
1KB // Microsoft corollary to Hanlon's razor:
// Never attribute to stupidity what can be
// adequately explained by malice.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature