Re: [gentoo-dev] Concerns about WIPE_TMP change
On Sat, 2008-01-19 at 02:48 +0100, Stefan de Konink wrote: In my opinion WIPE_TMP should be in the same state as RC_PARALLEL_STARTUP. That's a fair point. Luckily, the all the Gentoo init scripts that all my computers use are now at the stage where we could easily flick parallel startup on by default and expect it to work just fine. Thanks Roy -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Concerns about WIPE_TMP change
Mark Loeser wrote: Should an elog statement been put into the ebuild...maybe. I leave that up to the maintainer to decide what is important enough to be logged, and they clearly thought this wasn't in this case. I think that this would probably warrant an elog. Sure, anybody who knows the correct way to admin unix doesn't put anything important in /tmp - but educating our users before blowing away their data isn't a bad thing. We shouldn't assume our users are idiots, but this is an obscure enough piece of admin knowledge that I think that users will be impacted by the change. Doesn't impact me one way or another - in my case both /tmp and /var/tmp are tmpfs filesystems. However, I do have a few longer-duration temp folders on my system that get cleaned by tmpreaper but is used for stuff that is nice to keep around a little longer. -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Concerns about WIPE_TMP change
On Saturday 19 January 2008, Roy Marples wrote: On Sat, 2008-01-19 at 02:48 +0100, Stefan de Konink wrote: In my opinion WIPE_TMP should be in the same state as RC_PARALLEL_STARTUP. That's a fair point. how ? these two options are not related in the slightest. -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Concerns about WIPE_TMP change
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Mike Frysinger schreef: On Saturday 19 January 2008, Roy Marples wrote: On Sat, 2008-01-19 at 02:48 +0100, Stefan de Konink wrote: In my opinion WIPE_TMP should be in the same state as RC_PARALLEL_STARTUP. That's a fair point. how ? these two options are not related in the slightest. Because both options should be enabled manually under the presumption if one knows what one is doing. Potential dataloss vs Potential boot problems, I think that is the same ball park. Stefan -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHkmWYYH1+F2Rqwn0RCsuKAJ9JYYk75AU0DkmDKV7nS/MPdeNLRACeIaIl jZnOJaxMD4MnO0wGS4JnZSk= =fK5B -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Concerns about WIPE_TMP change
On Saturday 19 January 2008, Stefan de Konink wrote: Mike Frysinger schreef: On Saturday 19 January 2008, Roy Marples wrote: On Sat, 2008-01-19 at 02:48 +0100, Stefan de Konink wrote: In my opinion WIPE_TMP should be in the same state as RC_PARALLEL_STARTUP. That's a fair point. how ? these two options are not related in the slightest. Because both options should be enabled manually under the presumption if one knows what one is doing. Potential dataloss vs Potential boot problems, I think that is the same ball park. as Roy points out, parallel startup is stabilized which means it will be enabled by default WIPE_TMP had already been moved to yes by default in baselayout-2, i just got tired of waiting i can add an elog, but the arguments for not turning it on by default are far from convincing -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Concerns about WIPE_TMP change
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Mike Frysinger schreef: i can add an elog, but the arguments for not turning it on by default are far from convincing Please, only do this, and I'll stop about this subject. :) So something like *beep*beep*beep* /tmp will now by default cleaned upon restart, this behavior is configurable in /etc/conf.d/bootmisc. For more permanent temporary storage use /var/tmp. For more information about /tmp look at: http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#TMPTEMPORARYFILES Stefan -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHkmzDYH1+F2Rqwn0RCvVLAJ95si3oUVrzvmvhyozzYcqf58UJEwCfYCz7 Ieark6Y+rPn+Q7NKH9ZB8lU= =xkJy -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Concerns about WIPE_TMP change
Stefan de Konink [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: How stupid anyone could be that stores anything in /tmp. I think it is a problem to change the default behavior of a system that in essence will result in data loss. I think this might just be a communication problem. You seem to be contradicting yourself here by saying how someone could be stupid for storing something, and then defending people that are doing something you are admitting to be stupid and not logical. As pointed out by others you should not use /tmp to store data, my return question is then, why are the other ./tmp directories not wiped? If any ./tmp on a partition was 'kernel' governed I could agree that a semi-ramdisk would be gone upon reboot, or after an application was done running. But it is not. Because according to the FHS (and common sense), files or directories in /tmp should not be considered to be preserved. /var/tmp on the other hand is specifically for temporary files that should be preserved between reboots. In any case my request would be to put a message with bells and beeps in the ebuild that cause the /etc/conf.d/bootmisc change announcing that by then the default option for /tmp is deletion on boot. To be consistent, also delete /var/tmp. If anyone thinks wiping /var/tmp is evil, please reconsider /tmp too. In my opinion WIPE_TMP should be in the same state as RC_PARALLEL_STARTUP. Unless anyone can make sure a user knows what he is doing, disable it. Please refer to my explanation above as to why /var/tmp is different from /tmp. Should an elog statement been put into the ebuild...maybe. I leave that up to the maintainer to decide what is important enough to be logged, and they clearly thought this wasn't in this case. But bringing it up on this mailing list is atleast the correct place to get a discussion going on what should be mentioned when we change default configurations if that is your intention. Thanks, -- Mark Loeser email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org email - mark AT halcy0n DOT com web - http://www.halcy0n.com pgpDa8ODazvOL.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Concerns about WIPE_TMP change
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hello, I joined this mailinglist because of my concern pointed in: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=206604 How stupid anyone could be that stores anything in /tmp. I think it is a problem to change the default behavior of a system that in essence will result in data loss. As pointed out by others you should not use /tmp to store data, my return question is then, why are the other ./tmp directories not wiped? If any ./tmp on a partition was 'kernel' governed I could agree that a semi-ramdisk would be gone upon reboot, or after an application was done running. But it is not. In any case my request would be to put a message with bells and beeps in the ebuild that cause the /etc/conf.d/bootmisc change announcing that by then the default option for /tmp is deletion on boot. To be consistent, also delete /var/tmp. If anyone thinks wiping /var/tmp is evil, please reconsider /tmp too. In my opinion WIPE_TMP should be in the same state as RC_PARALLEL_STARTUP. Unless anyone can make sure a user knows what he is doing, disable it. Yours Sincerely, Stefan de Konink ps. No I did not have data loss, like any good admin I read before I apply. And yes I prefer to store anything that will not cause harm, such as extracted sources for gdb use in /tmp. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHkVb/YH1+F2Rqwn0RCsK4AJ4wEQPC5MrCrZdIEzKIjJkh+pKNoQCfX1BG alIrUmXiM2kulk3p635PiZk= =57tK -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
