This one time, at band camp, Thomas Hood wrote: >Jamie Wilkinson wrote: >> That is right! The core of the matter is not whether >> filesystems need to be mounted over the network or not, >> but whether the parts of the filesystem you are attempting >> to write to are on the root filesystem or not. > >The essence of /run/ had better not include that it be a >directory on the root filesystem, because the current proposal >is that it be possible for /run/ to be a RAM-based filesystem >on systems with read-only root media.
The problem I have with that is a catch-22 situation with mount trying to write to mtab, when the directory containing mtab doesn't yet exist. Your goal to make / mounted read-only will obviously need a solution to that. I don't have an answer to that just yet. >[... in another message:] >> Thus we don't need to compare /run to /var/run, but make /run available >> for the same purposes of the entirety of /var but only in the case that >> a required subdirectory of /var doesn't exist. > >I balk at this. IMHO we should call the new directory '/run/' >if and only if we are going to use it for the same purposes >for which we use /var/run/. If the new directory is to be a >whole parallel local var hierarchy then we should call it >something like '/lvar/'. However, I don't think we need a >whole parallel local var. I encourage the use of /var for the purposes outlined in the FHS. I only provide /run as a catchall for those programs that have no /var available. I do not expect there to be 13 or so subdirectories in /run to mirror /var. I do not expect more than a handful of programs to need /run at all. Off the top of my head, the only programs needing /run are mount and the sysvinit/login/pam combination, and the latter is certainly debatable. > >> This works for the case that >> some programs need a /var/run and some need a /var/state >> and some need a /var/lib for their file; > >/var/state/ is deprecated. > >Files stored in the proposed new directory will be lost on reboot, >so it is not suited to be a "lib" directory. I agree. I was not aware that /var/state was deprecated (so excuse my ignorance) though. In that case, then the description for /run can definitely compare itself to /var/run. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://people.debian.org/~jaq
