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

Bug#514326: debian-policy: fhs-2.3 doesn't specify that /var/run and /var/lock may be volatile ref rcS(5)



On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 02:32:20PM +0000, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 05:49:58PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Tim Small writes ("Bug#514326: debian-policy: fhs-2.3 doesn't specify that /var/run and /var/lock may be volatile ref rcS(5)"):
> > > "
> > > It should not be assumed that the contents of this directory will
> > > persist after a system reboot.
> > > "
> > 
> > I second this suggestion.  Does Tim's proposed phrasing make it clear
> > enough that all subdirectory structure may vanish ?
> 
> I also second this. Tim was referring to the text of the FHS, though
> (see the subject line), which I don't think we ought to modify in
> debian-policy for this.

I agree but I think we should try to push the change to the FHS.

> The code that tends to suffer from this problem is init scripts, and so
> I think it would be sensible to add a requirement in that section of the
> policy manual proper. Here's a suggested patch (note that this adds a
> new "must"; other policy editors, is that a problem? I'd be happy to
> downgrade to a "should" if people are uncomfortable with it):
> 
> diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
> index 36f51aa..75b236b 100644
> --- a/policy.sgml
> +++ b/policy.sgml
> @@ -6065,6 +6065,18 @@ test -f <var>program-executed-later-in-script</var> || exit 0
>  	    script must behave sensibly and not fail if the
>  	    <file>/etc/default</file> file is deleted.
>  	  </p>
> +
> +	  <p>
> +	    <file>/var/run</file> and <file>/var/lock</file> may be mounted
> +	    as temporary filesystems<footnote>
> +		For example, using the <tt>RAMRUN</tt> and <tt>RAMLOCK</tt>
> +		options in <file>/etc/default/rcS</file>.
> +	    </footnote>, so the <file>init.d</file> scripts must handle this
> +	    correctly. This will typically amount to creating any required
> +	    subdirectories dynamically when the <file>init.d</file> script
> +	    is run, rather than including them in the package and relying on
> +	    <prgn>dpkg</prgn> to create them.
> +	  </p>
>  	</sect1>
>  
>  	<sect1>

I second that.

Cheers,
-- 
Bill. <ballombe@debian.org>

Imagine a large red swirl here. 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: