Hi Roger, Roger Leigh wrote on Sat, Jul 02, 2011 at 10:25:08AM +0100: > On Sat, Jul 02, 2011 at 09:00:47AM +0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote: >> Jeff Licquia wrote on Fri, Jul 01, 2011 at 01:30:47PM -0400:
>>> We know that there are a number of other objectionable sections in the >>> FHS from the BSD point of view. If and when we get a decent solution >>> to those problems, we can rethink the way /run happens as part of that >>> solution. >> Sure; however, what you just committed would not help to improve >> that situation, but rather add another item to the list of issues >> to be rethought. > Just as a datapoint, on Debian GNU/kFreeBSD we use a nullfs mount > during initial setup so that /run has the same contents as /var/run. > On the next system restart, we transition /var/run to be a symlink, > and /run to a tmpfs mount. This is identical to what we do on > Linux, except there we use a bind mount rather than nullfs. If > nullfs is supported by all BSDs, this could be a possible > solution. On OpenBSD, the nullfs code was completely removed from the repository in 2005 because it was unmaintained, buggy and largely unused. It has not been missed since, and i'm not aware of any plans to bring it back. http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=111706859725229 http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=111707147811254 Even if it would be brought back, i think we can safely assume that nobody would be willing to enable use of it in the default install. Yours, Ingo _______________________________________________ fhs-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/fhs-discuss
