On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 09:48:53PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote: > On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 11:00:21PM -0400, Jeff Licquia wrote: > > FWIW, the LSB workgroup is working on an update to the FHS, and this > > issue is one of the primary motivations for the update. > > > > The FHS bug linked above is where we are coordinating our work. In > > addition, see the fhs-discuss thread here: > > > > https://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/fhs-discuss/2011-May/000061.html > > > > Our conclusion seems to be, so far: /run shall exist for the same > > basic purpose as /var/run historically, and its contents shall not > > be assumed to be persistent. > > > > Please comment on the FHS bug if you feel this is not sufficient or > > otherwise wrong. > > The FHS should make clear that /run is mounted and writable even in situation > where /var or / might not yet be, since it replaces /lib/init/rw. Agreed, this is one of its key defining characteristics. > Concerning this bug, I think we should add /run to the policy without waiting > for the new FHS, since it might contain changes that we might want to postpone > for squeeze+2. Sounds good. From my POV there are no changes since the last discussion of the text--I've just been working on getting the implementation going, and that hasn't changed anything. > How far are we in /run support in sid ? initramfs-tools: Changes are now all in git; just waiting for the upload. initscripts: Waiting on initramfs-tools, but otherwise ready to go bar a couple of patches I have in git (http://git.debian.org/?p=collab-maint/sysvinit;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/run4) So basically everything is done for getting /run working, and then we'll have some followup work migrating things once that's in place. Regards, Roger -- .''`. Roger Leigh : :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/ `. `' Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/ `- GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848 Please GPG sign your mail.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature