From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 29 20:52:52 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44432106566B for ; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 20:52:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from delphij@delphij.net) Received: from anubis.delphij.net (anubis.delphij.net [64.62.153.212]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24CBE8FC17 for ; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 20:52:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from delta.delphij.net (drawbridge.ixsystems.com [206.40.55.65]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by anubis.delphij.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 354CE16C87; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 13:52:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=delphij.net; s=anubis; t=1333054371; bh=L4GU2RRJZ3G6+4LFb8oOb1NToG/Lx+CXvzjq4EC+RCE=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=oA19jsR+esq/vD9Q8Dvc0m5stvK4iM3LbMYJVlkFfCcnapjFCuwAYhjQHIJIiwocw EQ+sdxPpMgcFDi95ukWubbu6/Qr/NgdMCHCCTSLsOLivnLyazGDudn+nPcXUq08M59 gjDZUCIW9NPgAJXCfNhXOSR3keoUXtSXdaMQPQ2E= Message-ID: <4F74CBA2.2010809@delphij.net> Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 13:52:50 -0700 From: Xin Li Organization: The FreeBSD Project MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Chris Rees References: <4F746F1E.6090702@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "O. Hartmann" , Current FreeBSD , d@delphij.net Subject: Re: Using TMPFS for /tmp and /var/run? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: d@delphij.net List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 20:52:52 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 03/29/12 09:41, Chris Rees wrote: > On 29 Mar 2012 16:49, "O. Hartmann" > wrote: >> >> I was wondering if there are some objections using TMPFS for /tmp >> and /var/run. I figured out some problems with some rc.d scripts >> when using TMPFS for /var/run, samba and OpenLDAP do store some >> informations like PID in a subfolder of their own in /var/run, >> but the rc.d scripts are not checking properly the existence of >> the appropritae folder (unlike "dbus" and "hald", they check >> properly!). >> >> I already submitted two PRs, but for SAMBA, my "hack" is trivial >> and obviously to clumsy, so it should be check properly. >> >> My question is whether there are objections using TMPFS for bot >> /tmp/ and /var/run/ at this stage on FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT/amd64? > > Any rc script that complains about an empty /var/run is buggy- it > should be assumed that it will be emptied on boot. Agreed. We may want a generic way of registering custom mtrees (or something) that creates the hierarchy on boot, by the way. Currently this has to be done by individual rc.d scripts if they need a separate directory. Cheers, - -- Xin LI https://www.delphij.net/ FreeBSD - The Power to Serve! Live free or die -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJPdMuiAAoJEG80Jeu8UPuzJKsH/js4Fsvb/drjTFGRwmOmSJ5V 7lfVxT6cuFTB1vpCTooR2rVzxZyfqSzeFwc5i8lbhK8+SA13Q46jkCZyHQCgoEqX n2ZIIMgIi+04+IQGrA9742Rkd/7RtvD88xf1wXcgkoY9IImpaYLvjVfcxMqxYMvI 75OHIsmvIbxt/vnmVx26Omh3ZvvHN2QI8n6lUqjqWVm96qEGwdoBuA+m2g5QKem/ 24gLZ0kttmO/zKo8vKRTgR9RiCYeS2IUueLy4PDmMKf8Oiv3/Y9f3c8S8Bw4qVdB cOKqugBtInCu3BnsPrDJpoNUiSb+Cf5aLggbPSocD9A1iToChDmyRF5eC6Tc6Kw= =owJ7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----