[arch-general] [PATCHES] About /var/run/ and /var/lock/ checks in daemons
shiningxc at gmail.com
Sat Feb 14 05:54:08 EST 2009
On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 3:39 AM, Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi
<vmlinuz386 at yahoo.com.ar> wrote:
> I will create a feature request to the FS that globalized packages that
> are required to be friendly with the desired behavior. Like in the
> initial email.
> Again, thanks for your time, good luck ;)
I was looking at your bug reports when I saw the following criticism :
It has nothing to do with laptop-mode-tools (I will blame dolby for
that :)), so I thought I would comment here instead.
I agree with phrakture's general comment that bug reports with only an
url are not nice, but as djgera said, this one is particular as a
multi feature request. However, here are the steps I would have done :
1) start the discussion on the arch-general ML as he did
2) see if there is enough interest for it, then post a meta feature
request with the same content than the original mail
3) if there is a common agreement, then post single feature request
for each packages in order to implement the meta feature request (I
believe the big feature request could depend on each single feature
So far you did 1), then you just reached 2), but in the meantime you
already made 3). I think this was a mistake. Imo, it should not be a
decision taken by each developer separately for his own packages. It
should be a common agreement made by developers that rc scripts should
be written that way (in theory) to support tmpfs on /var/*. If you
don't have this, it does not make sense to make this flood of bug
reports, as they could all be closed as invalid.
See http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/13225 for example.
Now we already have 2 devs, JGC and Pierre who seem to be against this
proposal, and who recommended you to just populate /var/run and others
based on an initial directory.
Then two users reported they were already using tmpfs with no
problems. Jan Spakula posted his modified rc.sysinit and rc.shutdown,
and Nicolas said he just wrote a separate rc script to do that syncing
I am not against your proposal, but you did not make clear what its
advantages are, and why it is worth the additional complexity?
More information about the arch-general