On Sun, 22.05.11 21:35, Roger Leigh ([email protected]) wrote: > On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 09:51:12PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > On Sun, 22.05.11 19:23, Richard Hartmann ([email protected]) > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 18:29, Lennart Poettering > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Look for XDG_RUNTIME_DIR. > > > > > > Purrrrrfect. > > > > > > > > > What do you think about putting that into /run, then? Assuming /run > > > exists, that is. > > > > Yes, that's where it is located by default. > > > > $ echo $XDG_RUNTIME_DIR > > /run/user/lennart > > Do we want to allow users to create files under /run, or reserve it > solely for system use? Right now, on Debian, it's not user-writable, > with the exception of /run/lock (which can be a separate tmpfs mount, > and we're looking at adding a lock group like other distros use to make > this not globally writable) and /run/shm (which again is a separate > tmpfs).
Dude, you want to weaken the access restrictions on /run? Uh, no! If we did that then everybody could just go there are and create /run/dbus and subsequently D-Bus couldn't be started anymore. > What makes /tmp unsuitable for this purpose? It's already possible > to securely create directories owned by the user there, and these > runtime files are, by definition, temporary. /tmp is a shared namespace. That means you have to store your stuff under randomized names in it, which makes it very much unsuitable for the purposed of $XDG_RUNTIME_DIR, which is to be a place for sockets and similar communication primitives (like pid files, ...) Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. _______________________________________________ fhs-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/fhs-discuss
