Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 00:47:25 +0200 From: cpghost@cordula.ws To: Gary Mulder <gmulder@infotechfl.com> Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: A question about /tmp Message-ID: <20040809224725.GA32518@bsdbox.farid-hajji.net> In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040809145427.01092be8@mail.infotechfl.com> References: <20040809083250.GA12445@lycurgue.localnet> <20040809083250.GA12445@lycurgue.localnet> <4.2.0.58.20040809145427.01092be8@mail.infotechfl.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Aug 09, 2004 at 03:00:59PM -0400, Gary Mulder wrote: > Of course having /tmp -> /var/tmp means that you have no valid /tmp in > single user mode where /var is not mounted. That is unless you created > /var/tmp in single user mode, but that would mean /var would be mounted > over the root partition's /var/tmp dir in multi-user mode, which can be > non-intuitive to say the least. > > The net result of not having a valid /tmp is that some commands issued in > single-user mode may fail non-obviously as they might (reasonably?) assume > /tmp is available. YES! Thanks for pointing this out! I've forgot to say that my /var mount point on the root partition instead of being empty, contains a tmp subdir /var/tmp (just as you've said). That's the reason why the symlink works even in single-user mode. After going multi-user, the real /var masks all single-user tempfiles, but THAT was never a problem, at least not for me. I admit that this setup is quite fragile. Thanks, -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040809224725.GA32518>