Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Joshua Murphy <poisonbl@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] conflict in fstab w/ lvm?
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 01:52:22
Message-Id: c30988c30906121852y51b39e46ob3ebcf48b94ea982@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] conflict in fstab w/ lvm? by Maxim Wexler
1 On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 5:52 PM, Maxim Wexler<maxim.wexler@×××××.com> wrote:
2 > On 6/12/09, Mike Kazantsev <mk.fraggod@×××××.com> wrote:
3 >> On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:45:04 -0600
4 >> Maxim Wexler <maxim.wexler@×××××.com> wrote:
5 >>
6 >>> #shm /dev/shm        tmpfs   nodev,nosuid,noexec     0 0
7 >>
8 >> I wonder, what's the rationale behind commenting out shm?
9 >>
10 >
11 > Good question. I was given to understand the new line was intended to
12 > replaced the default, which I commented out. Perhaps that's a mistake.
13 > That's how I configured the previous iteration of genteee before it
14 > went south; maybe the new line had something to do with it. Should I
15 > use both?
16 >
17 > mw
18
19 Hmm.
20 1) a tmpfs space is, by default, mounted on /dev/shm to meet some
21 standard somewhere (can't recall, FHS I think). The important thing to
22 note is that the name 'shm' is basically an unused placeholder (tmpfs
23 doesn't operate on an actual block device like /dev/hda1), and that
24 /dev/shm is the mount *point*. It should be there, and uncommented.
25
26 2) Yes it's 'legal' to mount the lvm volume onto /tmp *and* tmpfs
27 space as you have your fstab lines there, but I can't say for sure
28 which would truly be mounted first and which second, and in turn which
29 would actually be used in the running system. IF you intend to use
30 your system RAM to reduce read/write on your drive for temporary
31 files, comment out the use of the LVM volume on /tmp and just leave
32 the tmpfs mount on that point active (commenting leaves you free to
33 change your mind anytime you like).
34
35 3) Vaguely related to your mention of it 'taking its place' about the
36 /dev/shm and /tmp tmpfs mounts, the only time I've seen that mentioned
37 was in a conversation somewhere about 'why not just use a --bind mount
38 of /dev/shm onto /tmp to put it in tmpfs' ... which was answered with
39 the simple fact that, by default everywhere I've seen it, /dev/shm is
40 mounted noexec, while it's not altogether uncommon for things to be
41 decompressed into /tmp before execution (which would fail if /tmp were
42 mounted noexec).
43
44 --
45 Poison [BLX]
46 Joshua M. Murphy
47 "Without a struggle, there can be no progress." - Frederick Douglass

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] conflict in fstab w/ lvm? Mike Kazantsev <mk.fraggod@×××××.com>