On Fri, 4 May 2012 03:37:05 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: > > In my completely uninformed guess... a) tmpfs automatically 'cleans > > up' every reboot, making sure old folders aren't sitting around stale > > even if something did go wrong, and/or b) it's guaranteed writable for > > the service that needs to make those mount points. I could probably > > come up with a 'c', but I'd likely have to actually do a bit of > > reading on the topic before rising looking even more foolishly un-read > > on the topic than I already do! :-P > > > > Here you go, one time c): > > /run can be guaranteed to exist immediately after / is mounted, which > fixes a whole slew of really horrible problems if it isn't.
But it cannot be guaranteed that / is mounted rw at this time, so /run o tmpfs makes sense from that perspective. However, it is an illogical place to mount removable devices, whereas the function of /media is immediately obvious from its name. The link given indicates that systemd was already mounting /media as a tmpfs, is it really worth switching to an unintuitive location for the mountpoints just to save one tmpfs which uses so little resources? -- Neil Bothwick If Bill Gates had a dime for every time a Windows box crashed... ...Oh, wait a minute, he already does.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
