Hi all,
On Sat, 22 Jul 2023 04:24:17 +0800,
Saku Laesvuori via Bug reports for GNU Guix wrote:
>
> [1 <text/plain; us-ascii (quoted-printable)>]
> > > I vote for TMPFS, since that would also reduce flash wear.
> > > Honestly I don't get why it's not already using TMPFS.
> >
> > One argument could be how much ram it takes:
> >
> > $ du -sc /run/*
> > 12 /run/blkid
> > 0 /run/booted-system
> > 0 /run/current-system
> > 1312 /run/setuid-programs
> > 524 /run/udev
> > 1848 total
> >
> > That is with no explicit setuid programs configured, on a machine with a
> > fairly minimal configuration.
> >
> > Not a *huge* amount of ram, but not nothing, either...
>
> I'd say it's effectively nothing for almost all devices capable of
> running Guix. On my laptop the size of /run is 4804 (4.7M). In a quick
> test one terminal window with only zsh running in it took almost 10
> times as much ram.
> [2 signature.asc <application/pgp-signature (7bit)>]
> No public key for 257D284A2A1D3A32 created at 2023-07-22T04:24:17+0800 using
> RSA
I'm currently using tmpfs for /tmp, /run and /var/run on my Guix
Systems.
If you are interested, this is my base file systems:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
(cons* (file-system
(device "none")
(mount-point "/tmp")
(type "tmpfs")
(check? #f))
(file-system
(device "none")
(mount-point "/run")
(type "tmpfs")
(needed-for-boot? #t)
(check? #f))
(file-system
(device "none")
(mount-point "/var/run")
(type "tmpfs")
(needed-for-boot? #t)
(check? #f))
(delete %debug-file-system
%base-file-systems))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
Thanks
