[arch-general] /var/run should not be contained in the package file list.

[Tom Gundersen]

On Feb 22, 2012 7:05 PM, "Leonid Isaev" <lisaev at umail.iu.edu> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 18:33:24 +0100
> Tom Gundersen <teg at jklm.no> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Leonid Isaev <lisaev at umail.iu.edu>
wrote:
> > > The package-owner it 'filesystem'. But I disagree with the proposal
because
> >
> > I'm not really sure what you are disagreeing with...
> >
> > > (1) /var/run is a symlink, not a separate FS and (2) initscripts
should
> > > accomplish the minimum required operations and should mount only
absolutely
> > > necessary FS (not /tmp, /media or the like).
> >
> > Currently we have the following:
> >  * /var/run is a symlink (created on boot) to /run. This should be
> > changed in the future so the symlink is shipped with the filesystem
> > package, but we have not figured out the transtion yet.
>
> Ah, OK my information seems to be old. But fs package (2011.12) used to
have a
> symlink, right? Why was this changed?

No, it was only in svn, but had to revert it until we figure out the
upgrade path.

> >  * /run is a tmpfs, so if packages contain files in /var/run or in
> > /run, they will not survive a reboot. They should use the tmpfiles
> > mechanisem which we added for this purpose.
> >  * traditionally rc.sysinit deleted the contents of /var/run,
> > /var/lock and /tmp on boot, we have now a simpler and cleaner
> > situation since /var/run and /var/lock are on tmpfs. We did not force
> > /tmp to be on tmpfs as it does not matter from the point of view of
> > early boot. /media is probably going away in the long-run anyway, but
> > does at any rate not have anything to do with boot, so no danger of
> > that being touched.
> >
> > -t
>
>
> --
> Leonid Isaev
> GnuPG key ID: 164B5A6D
> Key fingerprint: C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE  775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D