From owner-freebsd-security Wed Jun 7 1:53:36 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from zeta.qmw.ac.uk (zeta.qmw.ac.uk [138.37.6.6]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E2E937B881 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 01:53:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from d.m.pick@qmw.ac.uk) Received: from xi.css.qmw.ac.uk ([138.37.8.11]) by zeta.qmw.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12zbZi-00003j-00; Wed, 07 Jun 2000 09:52:34 +0100 Received: from cgaa180 by xi.css.qmw.ac.uk with local (Exim 1.92 #1) id 12zbZi-0000w9-00; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 09:52:34 +0100 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: Matthew Dillon Cc: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group , "mouss" , "Peter van Dijk" , freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSDDEATH.c.txt (mmap dirty page no check bug) In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 06 Jun 2000 23:55:03 PDT." <200006070655.XAA97086@apollo.backplane.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2000 09:52:34 +0100 From: David Pick Message-Id: Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > Maybe on your system it is, but try running a multi-user system tha= t > way and you will quickly find your /var/tmp filled up to the brim. = Or, > worse, you will find one of the two tmp directories filling up whil= e > the other remains entirely empty, or vise-versa depending on which > programs your users run. > = > The argument that we should have two tmp's because one should be > treated differently from the other doesn't hold any water. There > should be one tmp, period. Since programs tend to use /var/tmp = > and /tmp interchangeably these days, one has to be a symlink to the= > other. But trying to classify the two as having to have different > characteristics only creates sysadmin headaches. > = > What it comes down to is that it is far easier and far more robust = to > have a single (larger) temporary filesystem to maintain then to hav= e = > two. I think I have to agree with Matthews comments here. Generally, one filesystem for temporary files uses disc space better and means there are a smaller number of filesystems that can get filled up by rampant "temporary" file creations. Personally, I prefer a separate filesystem (on disc, not in memory) in most cases, to avoid rampant temporary files screwing up the logs, but if not I think "/var" is the best bet. "/usr" is not a good idea because I think it's a good idea to mount "/usr" read-only if possible. If you really want to make the distinction between "/tmp" and "/var/tmp" in terms of files being automatically cleared, I suggest that a "temp" filesystem called (for example) "/temp" could have a directory in it called "temporally_temporary" which could be cleared, and: /var/tmp -> /temp /tmp -> /temp/temporally_temporary or, if there is no separate filesystem, a similar: /tmp -> /var/tmp/temporally_temporary -- = David Pick To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message