On Mon, 2012-04-02 at 20:58 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 08:32:56PM +0200, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
* #834 F18 Feature: /tmp on tmpfs -
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/tmp-on-tmpfs (mitr, 17:40:06)
* AGREED: tmp-on-tmpfs is accepted (+5 -3) (mitr,
On 2 April 2012 20:58, Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 08:32:56PM +0200, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
* #834 F18 Feature: /tmp on tmpfs -
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/tmp-on-tmpfs (mitr, 17:40:06)
* AGREED: tmp-on-tmpfs is accepted (+5 -3) (mitr,
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 08:58:12PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 08:32:56PM +0200, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
* #834 F18 Feature: /tmp on tmpfs -
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/tmp-on-tmpfs (mitr, 17:40:06)
* AGREED: tmp-on-tmpfs is accepted (+5 -3)
drago01 wrote:
We could just make anaconda remove everything in /tmp ... done.
First of all, renaming it as Simo Sorce suggested makes more sense.
But secondly, what you both miss is that not everyone upgrades using
Anaconda, there's also plain yum. Seeing more and more black magic getting
On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 11:51:08AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
drago01 wrote:
We could just make anaconda remove everything in /tmp ... done.
First of all, renaming it as Simo Sorce suggested makes more sense.
But secondly, what you both miss is that not everyone upgrades using
Anaconda,
On Wed, 04.04.12 09:31, Jonathan Underwood (jonathan.underw...@gmail.com) wrote:
On 2 April 2012 20:58, Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 08:32:56PM +0200, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
* #834 F18 Feature: /tmp on tmpfs -
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 5:10 AM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Actually I think this is a good feature, but ...
I'm unsure about whether this makes sense for new installs or not, but I
feel my objection in
On Tue, 2012-04-03 at 05:10 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Actually I think this is a good feature, but ...
I'm unsure about whether this makes sense for new installs or not, but I
feel my objection in
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Talk:Features/tmp-on-tmpfs was not
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 08:32:56PM +0200, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
* #834 F18 Feature: /tmp on tmpfs -
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/tmp-on-tmpfs (mitr, 17:40:06)
* AGREED: tmp-on-tmpfs is accepted (+5 -3) (mitr, 18:12:52)
Actually I think this is a good feature, but ...
The
On 04/02/2012 15:58, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 08:32:56PM +0200, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
* #834 F18 Feature: /tmp on tmpfs -
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/tmp-on-tmpfs (mitr,
17:40:06)
* AGREED: tmp-on-tmpfs is accepted (+5 -3) (mitr, 18:12:52)
Actually
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 04:04:23PM -0400, David Quigley wrote:
On 04/02/2012 15:58, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 08:32:56PM +0200, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
* #834 F18 Feature: /tmp on tmpfs -
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/tmp-on-tmpfs (mitr,
17:40:06)
*
On 04/02/2012 16:06, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 04:04:23PM -0400, David Quigley wrote:
On 04/02/2012 15:58, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 08:32:56PM +0200, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
* #834 F18 Feature: /tmp on tmpfs -
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 9:58 PM, Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 08:32:56PM +0200, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
* #834 F18 Feature: /tmp on tmpfs -
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/tmp-on-tmpfs (mitr, 17:40:06)
* AGREED: tmp-on-tmpfs is accepted (+5 -3)
On Mon, 02.04.12 20:58, Richard W.M. Jones (rjo...@redhat.com) wrote:
Heya,
The feature page is wrong about The user experience should barely
change. This is mostly a low-level change that has little visibility
to the user.
Well, i'd claim this is not really user visible if implemented
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 10:24:38PM +0200, drago01 wrote:
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 9:58 PM, Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com wrote:
- it doesn't support O_DIRECT
Neither does this (which apps needs O_DIRECT on /tmp ? ).
qemu and libguestfs as it turned out. It was one of the things we
On Mon, 02.04.12 21:30, Richard W.M. Jones (rjo...@redhat.com) wrote:
- it doesn't support user extended attrs; and not very old kernels
didn't support any xattrs at all, meaning things like SELinux
labels don't work
Huh? Why would you run a very old kernel on fedora?
It's
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 04:40:38PM -0400, David Quigley wrote:
You don't specify seclabel as an option. It is something that is put
into the mount command to show you that a filesystem supports being
able to set security labels on it.
OK, I see. In fact I tested this and I was able to set
On Monday, April 02, 2012 03:58:12 PM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
* #834 F18 Feature: /tmp on tmpfs -
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/tmp-on-tmpfs (mitr, 17:40:06)
* AGREED: tmp-on-tmpfs is accepted (+5 -3) (mitr, 18:12:52)
Actually I think this is a good feature, but ...
On Mon, 02.04.12 16:55, Steve Grubb (sgr...@redhat.com) wrote:
On Monday, April 02, 2012 03:58:12 PM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
* #834 F18 Feature: /tmp on tmpfs -
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/tmp-on-tmpfs (mitr, 17:40:06)
* AGREED: tmp-on-tmpfs is accepted (+5 -3)
Richard W.M. Jones (rjo...@redhat.com) said:
- it doesn't support user extended attrs; and not very old kernels
didn't support any xattrs at all, meaning things like SELinux
labels don't work
Huh? Why would you run a very old kernel on fedora?
It's not unknown that people
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 20:58:12 +0100,
Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com wrote:
- it doesn't support O_DIRECT
I thought this was also true of ext4 with data journaling enabled.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 2 April 2012 14:55, Steve Grubb sgr...@redhat.com wrote:
On Monday, April 02, 2012 03:58:12 PM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
* #834 F18 Feature: /tmp on tmpfs -
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/tmp-on-tmpfs (mitr, 17:40:06)
* AGREED: tmp-on-tmpfs is accepted (+5 -3) (mitr,
On Mon, 2 Apr 2012, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Mon, 02.04.12 16:55, Steve Grubb (sgr...@redhat.com) wrote:
What about forensics? Any reboot erases information that might have been needed
to see what happened during a break in.
/tmp is already volatile and cleaned up in regular intervals.
* M A Young [02/04/2012 23:51] :
This also means a big change in user experience as many will be
expecting things in /tmp to remain there for a while before being
deleted even if the system is restarted or crashes.
The expectations of these 'many' (this really needs to be measured)
run
24 matches
Mail list logo
