Re: how to increase space for tmpfs /tmp
On Wed 28 Mar 2012 at 15:12:19 +0000, Camaleón wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 15:50:50 +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
>
> > The improvement long term *could* be valuable enough to justify the
> > pain. The correct way is usually not the easy way.
>
> And what (or who) decides what is "correct"?
It's my package so I do. Hopefully, I make the same sensible decisions
Roger Leigh makes.
> I've just seen another thread at this mailing list where "another" user
> has been hit by this "correct" default. I don't mean that having "/tmp"
> mounted as "tmpfs" is not correct but the default is clearly not suited
> to many of the users as you can see.
For years I've gone with the Debian tmpfs defaults. Me and thousands of
others. We don't speak up so often as the ones who have problems. The
machine without swap space is a good point; one of mine is configured
like that.
But defaults are defaults. Files in /etc/default can be altered. Do I
really want portmap to listen on all interfaces? Do I want CUPS to load
a driver for a parallel port printer when I do not have one. No? Then I
change the situation. But if I do not it doesn't lead to disaster.
> > One of the big reasons I love Debian is because it is not afraid to
> > choose the hard path[1] when the long term benefits are worth it.
>
> (...)
>
> Although that's your personal opinion as you can easily understand it has
> nothing to do with the issue we are currently debating. Every user can/do
> love Debian for their own/different reasons but none of our personal
> reasons can be used as arguments to make changes in the defaul settings,
> unless there's a strong technical reason that proves they're the right
> thing to do, which I still don't see for this specific issue.
Andrei's 'hard path' is one which involves the primary concern being a
focus on technical excellence. It's pleasing to see you agree with this.
Reply to: