From 1be510f9529cb082f802408b472a77d074b394c0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nicolas Vigier Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:46:12 +0000 Subject: Add zarb MLs html archives --- zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-September/018625.html | 111 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 111 insertions(+) create mode 100644 zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-September/018625.html (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-September/018625.html') diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-September/018625.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-September/018625.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..0a3984151 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-September/018625.html @@ -0,0 +1,111 @@ + + + + [Mageia-dev] /run vs /var/run in configuration files + + + + + + + + + +

[Mageia-dev] /run vs /var/run in configuration files

+ nicolas vigier + boklm at mars-attacks.org +
+ Tue Sep 11 12:16:41 CEST 2012 +

+
+ +
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Guillaume Rousse wrote:
+
+> Hello list.
+>
+> Since /usrmove, /run and /var/run is actually the same location on the 
+> final running system. So, either can be used in actual configuration files, 
+> and systemd unit files. But for consistency and comparaison purpose, it 
+> would be better to enforce usage of one variant only.
+>
+> I initially started to use /run in a few packages, however I'm considering 
+> reverting this practice for multiple reasons:
+> - fedora keep using /var/run, which makes comparaison harder
+> - it make backporting more difficult
+> - similar /lib vs /usr/lib case exist, and our %_unitdir macro, for 
+> instance, uses the second form
+>
+> Any other thought on this topic ?
+
+Maybe we should also have a %_rundir macro ?
+
+
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+

+ +
+More information about the Mageia-dev +mailing list
+ -- cgit v1.2.1