On Mon, 2012-05-28 at 10:40 +1000, Russell Coker wrote: > On Mon, 28 May 2012, Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> wrote: > > On 05/27/2012 09:38 PM, Russell Coker wrote: > > > Sure it's easy for me to fix that when upgrading and when compared to all > > > the other things I have to do on an upgrade it's not much of a big deal. > > > > It's *not* easy, this involve init.d script foo ATM. See #674517. > > As noted in that bug report you can just edit /etc/default/rcS to make it not > use a tmpfs for /tmp. That is easy to fix. > > On Mon, 28 May 2012, Jon Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> wrote: > > On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 04:25:30PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > > We should be thinking about implementing per-user temporary directories > > > and making sure that programs respect $TMPDIR. (On Linux it's also > > > possible to give each user a different /tmp through mount namespaces. > > > I'm not sure whether that's compatible with historical use of /tmp by > > > the X window system.) > > > > Yes! This is a good idea for other reasons, too, including some disc > > encryption situations. Perhaps it's a candidate for a release goal for > > wheezy+1? Some scoping work is probably required. > > Using a bind mount to make /tmp/.X11-unix available to the logged in user > isn't going to be difficult. What is /tmp/.X0-lock used for? > > As for making it a release goal for wheezy+1, it can't be enabled by default > because usually the users expect to be able to share files via /tmp. I don't recall that being common practice on any multi-user Unix-like system I've used. (It's also not something a Windows user would expect, as they already get per-user temporary directories.) Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Teamwork is essential - it allows you to blame someone else.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part