| 1 |
On 6 February 2013 13:55, Diego Elio Pettenò <flameeyes@×××××××××.eu> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 06/02/2013 14:52, Markos Chandras wrote: |
| 3 |
>> I see a lot of inconsistencies in the init scripts. Some of them are |
| 4 |
>> using /var/run, others use /run. I just checked my box, and there is |
| 5 |
>> no /var/run although some init scripts are trying to use it. Which one |
| 6 |
>> is the correct one and why do we have both? The following guide only |
| 7 |
>> mentions /var/run |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> We should be migrating to /run at this point. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> http://goo.gl/hrWcN |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> -- |
| 14 |
> Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes |
| 15 |
> flameeyes@×××××××××.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/ |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Thanks. Would it made sense to symlink /var/run -> /run so we don't |
| 19 |
end up with stable entries in /var/run directory? Some of my init |
| 20 |
scripts appear to reported as "crashed" whereas the process is running |
| 21 |
just fine. I suspect this is because a stale entry is in /var/run |
| 22 |
directory (or /run I am not sure) |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
Regards, |
| 26 |
Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer |
| 27 |
http://dev.gentoo.org/~hwoarang |
Archives