Re: Bug#620870: debian-policy: Please add /run as FHS exception
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 10:33:23PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2011, Michael Biebl wrote:
> > At the current state, I'm not for adding /run/shm to debian-policy.
> > If we can get wider acceptance of this feature (cross-distro), then my position
> > on this might change. Atm this looks like a Debian-only feature with no real
> > use-case why we need that.
> Hmm? The only acceptable access to /dev/shm (and therefore /run/shm) by
> normal applications is through the SYSV shmem API. Wider distro acceptance
> is a non-issue.
> That doesn't mean I think it is a good idea to move it to /run, I think it
> is a bad idea.
What made /dev/shm a good idea in the first place though? It's not a
device, it's a temporary filesystem storing ephemeral program/system
data. Which is exactly the remit for /run.
> IMHO the only interesting use-case for /run/shm seems to be breaking for
> good any crap that still abuses /dev/shm, which is not nearly enough a good
> reason to mess with it. I consider storing shm data inside the /run
> filesystem to be a misfeature (as opposed to having it as a separete tmpfs),
> so "merging" it with /run is exactly what I'd not like to see happening.
Nothing is broken: /dev/shm is a compatibility symlink to /run/shm.
There are no plans to remove this. If it were to be removed, we would
need an updated glibc which used the new path, and we would also need
to wait at least a stable release to avoid breakage over upgrades.
By default, /run/shm is a separate filesystem to /run; it's not
"merged" unless you configure it to do so. What the new layout
gives you is the /ability/ to merge them should you choose to; this
does not imply that it would be a sensible default--it's not.
.''`. 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.