On Tue, Oct 07, 2025 at 01:54:10PM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote: > I agree with everything in your e-mail, but it seems entirely possible > to reach the same goal by having /var/lock be "owned" by some other > package instead of systemd, which apparently have little interest to > support /var/lock. I can sympathise with systemd upstream on that, and > their desire to drop everything about /var/lock. Moving ownership of > /var/lock to another package, e.g., a NEW 'var-lock' package, may be a > friendlier way forward to everyone. > > Is there a reason the /var/lock directory MUST be provided by systemd > and no other package could provide it? > > Then all packages that need /var/lock in Debian can depend on this > 'var-lock' package, which would also allow us to better track which > packages still use this suboptimal interface for device locking. Or > just move the directory to 'base-files' or similar.
Please note that /var/lock is just a symlink to /run/lock, and both base-files and systemd agree that such symlink should exist (even if their implementation differ a little). Since /run/lock is volatile, base-files is a bad place to keep the real directory. Thanks.
