Re: [gentoo-dev] The /run migration

[Ian Stakenvicius]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 06/02/13 09:18 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> On 06/02/13 09:02 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
>> On 06/02/2013 14:58, Markos Chandras wrote:
>>> Thanks. Would it made sense to symlink /var/run -> /run so we
>>> don't end up with stable entries in /var/run directory? Some
>>> of my init scripts appear to reported as "crashed" whereas the
>>> process is running just fine. I suspect this is because a
>>> stale entry is in /var/run directory (or /run I am not sure)
>
>> I would say that we should have that symlink, and I told
>> WilliamH so before. I think he was going to ask Mike (vapier)
>> about adding the symlink to baselayout itself, so that it doesn't
>> get reaped away.
>
>> I agree that the symlink should stay there for compatibility at
>> least, which should also answer Ian's question.
>
>
> OK - so I've noticed some issues with the way the /run migration
> has gone down; it seems that a lot of systems do not have a
> consistent migration and as I don't remember (and my initial look
> couldn't find) the details for its implementation, I'm hoping
> someone can chime in and (A) describe the process as it is supposed
> to work, and (B) point out where it's implemented so that this
> implementation can be adjusted (or how it's been adjusted can be
> reviewed) to get everyone's system to a consistent state.
>
> Normally i'd just ask WilliamH on irc, but since this is more of a
> forensic discussion i thought it better to do it here..
>
> So, *my* systems do have /var/run -> /run , which means at some
> point the /run migration did happen and compatibility symlinks were
> created. If hwoarang's systems don't have this, there must be an
> issue somewhere.
>
> Now, with /run migration itself -- WilliamH and I discussed this
> issue where /run (when the initial change was to be made if
> upgrading to openrc-0.11.x) would always have a symlink to
> /lib/something/openrc/ in the directory itself (that is, underneath
> the tmpfs mount). However when I investigated, I discovered that
> two of my systems had actual dead directories and temp files in
> /run (and no symlink).  Code has been added to /etc/init.d/bootmisc
> to clean out anything in /run underneath the tmpfs, but it might be
> pertinent to figure out why this happened in the first place, as it
> might be related to why the /var/run symlink might not have been
> created (and relate to other inconsistencies we haven't found
> yet).
>


As a follow up -- there are probably two cases to look at; #1 are
stable-only users (so just what happens when the stable bumps
occurred), and #2 are ~arch users and/or ~arch keyworders.  I'm going
to guess that the majority of inconsistencies with the planned results
will come from #2 as the different implementations of /run migration
would have taken place differently with each ~arch bump depending on
who installed what when..


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)

iF4EAREIAAYFAlESZy8ACgkQ2ugaI38ACPDtpAD+N8OuOAL44dwCL2EE72IzGuxX
Bmz9YFagyEqauI2da5UA/RIAfpPDdd0of0LDxH1T/9C5stnbovzlRqnQCKi66e+1
=SWm7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----