The issue of where to put state information that needs to be stored prior to the initialization of networking (or independently of networking) has been discussed before. The longest discussion I can recall was in the spring of 2003 and had the subject headings:
* ifupdown writes to /etc... a bug? * /run and read-only /etc * /run/, resolvconf and read-only root As indicated by the last subject heading, the state-storage issue is related to the issue of eliminating variable data from the root filesystem so that the latter can be read-only. I created a web page to summarize my views on this issue and in order to track the development of resolvconf (now a mature package) and the removal of variable files from /etc/. http://panopticon.csustan.edu/thood/readonly-root.html I won't summarize the whole discussion here. I will just say that I see good reasons for adopting /run as a standard location for the storage of state information that needs to be stored prior to the availability of networking. I see no good reasons for not adopting it. If /run is created as a standard location then of course I will make resolvconf use that location. The only reason that resolvconf currently uses /dev/shm is that the last time this was discussed there was no consensus that /run should be created and endorsed as a standard Debian directory. Using /dev/shm seemed like a reasonable alternative, although using this location took more work to debug than I expected. One non-silly argument for not adopting /run as the standard location was that using /run would (allegedly) violate the FHS. However, it would NOT violate the FHS. FHS 2.2 contained language that might reasonably be taken to rule out the use of any root directories not already on the list, but, especially in light of the fact that many distributions do create such directories for special purposes, FHS 2.3 clarified this to: Distributions should not create new directories in the root hierarchy without extremely careful consideration of the consequences including for application portability. I spoke to Christopher Yeoh about getting explicit FHS endorsement of /run and he said that so long as there is a justification for creating the directory there is no reason why it shouldn't be explicitly endorsed in the next version of the FHS. At the present time I know of the following files which might appropriately be kept in a subdirectory of /run/. /etc/nologin /etc/mtab /etc/network/run/ifstate /etc/resolvconf/run/* -- Thomas Hood -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]