All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Phil Blundell <philb@gnu.org>
To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: base-files vs. FHS-2.3
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 12:03:55 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1297339435.2178.23.camel@phil-desktop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D53C412.9090804@dresearch.de>

On Thu, 2011-02-10 at 11:55 +0100, Steffen Sledz wrote:
> While dealing with the /var subdirs i hit some differences between Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (current FHS-2.3) and the base-files package.
> 
> One point is that /var/tmp is symlinked to volatile/tmp but according to the standard this dir contains "Temporary files *preserved between system reboots* ".
> 
> Also /var/cache is symlinked to volatile/cache but the standard describes "The data must remain valid between invocations of the application *and rebooting the system.* " what i would read in the way that /var/cache should be persistent too.
> 
> May be there are other differences.
> 
> In my opinion the symlinking in base-files is buggy and should be fixed. Or am i wrong here?

It probably would be good to have a version of base-files which was
fully FHS conformant.  But there are a significant number of OE target
systems where it is simply impossible to comply with these requirements
since there is no persistent read/write storage available: the only
choice is between flash (persistent but read-only) and ramdisk
(read-write but volatile).  

Clearly, placing /var/tmp or /var/cache in a readonly location is
unlikely to produce any useful results so linking them into volatile/ is
the least bad option in that situation.  Any change to base-files would
need to be done with some level of care in order to not break those
kinds of setups which do work today.  I guess it should be a DISTRO
decision whether or not to adhere to the FHS in this area.

p.





  reply	other threads:[~2011-02-10 12:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-02-10 10:55 base-files vs. FHS-2.3 Steffen Sledz
2011-02-10 12:03 ` Phil Blundell [this message]
2011-02-10 14:32   ` Mark Hatle
2011-02-25  8:50     ` Steffen Sledz
2011-02-25 11:00       ` Phil Blundell

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1297339435.2178.23.camel@phil-desktop \
    --to=philb@gnu.org \
    --cc=openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.