| 1 |
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 3:33 PM, Eray Aslan wrote: |
| 3 |
>> It will be somewhat more work but instead of the above, we can say "tmpfs |
| 4 |
>> might be used for /var/run and /var/lock and the init scripts should handle |
| 5 |
>> this correctly". It feels (for want of a better word) better. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> i certainly use a tmpfs on /var/run to minimize disk writes. packages |
| 8 |
> that break i file bugs for and/or fix myself. it isnt that hard. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> plus, it's just good behavior. if /var/run gets removed for whatever |
| 11 |
> reason, people have to re-emerge a bunch of packages to simply create |
| 12 |
> a subdir ? that's silly. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
for people who do wish to improve their init.d scripts, recreating a |
| 15 |
dir is easy if your init.d runs after localmount: |
| 16 |
[ ! -d /var/run/foo ] && install -d -m 755 -o fowner -g fgroup /var/run/foo |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
if your init.d runs before localmount, you'll have to resort to normal |
| 19 |
mkdir/chown/chmod, but i dont think there are many (any?) scripts |
| 20 |
that'll hit this set of requirements |
| 21 |
-mike |
Archives