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

Bug#621803: Add support for /run directory

On Apr 26, rleigh <rleigh@codelibre.net> wrote:

> Testing with initramfs-tools (maks/run) with current unstable shows
> udev appearing to work correctly with it using /dev/.udev when /run
> is not present on the host system.  And also with /run present on
Did you check with LVM and that all its persistent symlinks are still

> In a kvm VM, I do see some errors from udev at startup:
These are unrelated and harmless (the errors are old, only the message
is new).

> > Why does /run should not be noexec?
> If /run/shm is also on /run (not a separate mount), it needs to be
> executable.
Why do we need it executable?

> > > Marco, have you tested this upgrade path?  That is /run in the
> > > initramfs and no /run on the rootfs?  Is udev checking for that and
> > No, but if the database is not copied to the initramfs then LVM will be
> > annoyed.
> Which database is this?  Is this something that the LVM scripts need
> updating to handle?
It is /dev/.udev/ or /run/udev/. I do not know exactly how LVM interacts
with it, just that it must be preserved.

> I just sent a separate mail after doing some testing.  The current logic
> in 168-1 does appear to move /run/udev (initramfs) to /dev/.udev when
> /run is not present on the host.  Looks good to me.
No, there is no such code in the udev package. What you are seeing is
/run/udev/ being lost when the initramfs is destroyed and a new


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: