Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 20:52:39 +0100 From: Jose M Rodriguez <josemi@freebsd.jazztel.es> To: Dejan Lesjak <dejan.lesjak@ijs.si> Cc: Jose M Rodriguez <josemi@freebsd.jazztel.es> Subject: Re: x11 /tmp preparation rc.d script Message-ID: <41E2DD07.6010607@redesjm.local> In-Reply-To: <200501102003.35785.dejan.lesjak@ijs.si> References: <1105321614.8452.54.camel@leguin> <41E23F8F.4040701@redesjm.local> <1105382156.2497.6.camel@leguin> <200501102003.35785.dejan.lesjak@ijs.si>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dejan Lesjak escribió: >[rc@ list CCed as this threads on their territory, the start of thread is >here: >http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-x11/2005-January/001474.html] > >On Monday 10 of January 2005 19:35, Eric Anholt wrote: > > >>On Mon, 2005-01-10 at 09:40 +0100, Jose M Rodriguez wrote: >> >> >>>Jose M Rodriguez escribió: >>> >>> >>>>Eric Anholt escribió: >>>> >>>> >>>>>Attached are my proposed patches to deal with the X11 ICE issue. To >>>>>review, it's required because having .ICE not owned by root is a >>>>>security issue, one that's been papered over with a printed warning >>>>>and sleep(5) in libICE for years, and has recently been changed into >>>>>an actual error by the X.Org folks. >>>>> >>>>> >>>... >>> >>>As a latter think about this, consider take also periodic related fixes >>>(We clear this directories by default) and try to get a OS_VERSION bump >>>closest to this. >>> >>> >>I'm sorry, I'm not sure what exactly you're talking about here. Are you >>saying that /etc/periodic contains something that will wipe out X's >>files in /tmp? That would be rather broken. >> >> > >/etc/periodic/daily/110.clean-tmps cleans out empty directories that have not >been modified in $daily_clean_tmps_days days. This ones should therefore be >added to $daily_clean_tmps_ignore in /etc/defaults/periodic.conf, just to be >on the safe side. > >Other than that, I don't really know what would be the best way to handle >creation of this directories and haven't commented so far, but since I'm >already writing (mostly because I thought rc@ list should be CCed), here's my >opinion FWIW: the simplest seems to be a patch from Pawel Worach at >http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/htdig/freebsd-current/2004-November/042445.html >The benefit of using this simple approach is that it is simple (of course :) >and furthermore it only adds two more directories to /tmp at startup as >oposed to adding a file in /etc/rc.d. The difference being one inode. But >then again, perhaps I don't see all the implications and this is too simple. > The only I know is that this breaks rcNG writing rules. This is a little more than style. I think that goin more modular can't hurt. >Is there a real benefit in creating another rc.d script for doing this and >adding a knob to turn creation of these directories off? > > Even more critical paths in the boot process are controlled in this manner. Why not? >Yes of course that would only solve things on -current and -stable, however > > This was allways the main problem of solve this 'only base'. >there is already an UPDATING entry for this and we can always add a script to >be installed from a port that would take care of transition period (probably >as soon in dependency tree as possible, ie -libraries). > > There are PRs on this. I think that latest rcNG script (with perhaps some tweaks to work from ports) installed from Xorg libraries will be the better first step. We may make this install_script conditional when we have the problem solved in RELENG_5 base (test OS_VERSION) and lost this when RELENG_4 life cycle was expired. >Dejan > > > > -- josemi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?41E2DD07.6010607>