Re: [gentoo-user] How can I control size of /run (tmpfs)?

[Canek Peláez Valdés]

On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 1:20 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés <caneko@×××××.com> wrote:
> On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 11:29 PM, Joshua Murphy <poisonbl@×××××.com> wrote:
> [ snip ]
>> Well, given that it's there, it cleans up after itself, and it avoids
>> issues in the instance where /var isn't available early on, is there
>> much reason _not_ to link /var/run and /var/lock over to their
>> respective equivalents on /run?
>
> I use systemd, which was the one introducing both /run and /run/lock:
>
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2011-March/001757.html
>
> With systemd, /var/run and /var/lock are bind-mounted to /run and
> /run/lock respectively. /run uses in my laptop (regularly suspended,
> with an uptime of 25 days) 8.8 megabytes, which I think is basically
> nothing for my 4 gigabyte RAM.
>
> After more programs (dracut, plymouth) started using /run and
> /run/lock, OpenRC implemented the same functionality; or so I read
> somewhere, I haven't used OpenRC in a while. In theory, it should work
> the same as with systemd.

I take that back; OpenRC doesn't bind-mount /run in /var/run. I ssh'd
to a server running OpenRC, and /var/run is independent from /run. And
still a regular directory, not a tmpfs.

That's a shame. Given that udev uses /run (stable "old" version,
171-r6), OpenRC should use it too; there is basically no cost, and the
gains are obvious.

With systemd is automatic the bind-mounting of /run into /var/run.
Perhaps a future version of OpenRC will use it?

Regards.
-- 
Canek Peláez Valdés
Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México