Bug#514326: debian-policy: fhs-2.3 doesn't specify that /var/run and /var/lock may be volatile ref rcS(5)

2009-02-25 Thread Colin Watson
tags 514326 pending thanks On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 08:06:00PM +, Tim Small wrote: Colin Watson wrote: Tim was referring to the text of the FHS, though (see the subject line), which I don't think we ought to modify in debian-policy for this. Yes, sorry about that, I hadn't appreciated

Bug#514326: debian-policy: fhs-2.3 doesn't specify that /var/run and /var/lock may be volatile ref rcS(5)

2009-02-16 Thread Colin Watson
On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 05:49:58PM +, Ian Jackson wrote: Tim Small writes (Bug#514326: debian-policy: fhs-2.3 doesn't specify that /var/run and /var/lock may be volatile ref rcS(5)): It should not be assumed that the contents of this directory will persist after a system reboot.

Bug#514326: debian-policy: fhs-2.3 doesn't specify that /var/run and /var/lock may be volatile ref rcS(5)

2009-02-16 Thread Colin Watson
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 02:32:20PM +, Colin Watson wrote: The code that tends to suffer from this problem is init scripts, and so I think it would be sensible to add a requirement in that section of the policy manual proper. Here's a suggested patch (note that this adds a new must; other

Bug#514326: debian-policy: fhs-2.3 doesn't specify that /var/run and /var/lock may be volatile ref rcS(5)

2009-02-16 Thread Russ Allbery
Colin Watson cjwat...@debian.org writes: The code that tends to suffer from this problem is init scripts, and so I think it would be sensible to add a requirement in that section of the policy manual proper. Here's a suggested patch (note that this adds a new must; other policy editors, is

Bug#514326: debian-policy: fhs-2.3 doesn't specify that /var/run and /var/lock may be volatile ref rcS(5)

2009-02-16 Thread Bill Allombert
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 02:32:20PM +, Colin Watson wrote: On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 05:49:58PM +, Ian Jackson wrote: Tim Small writes (Bug#514326: debian-policy: fhs-2.3 doesn't specify that /var/run and /var/lock may be volatile ref rcS(5)): It should not be assumed that the

Bug#514326: debian-policy: fhs-2.3 doesn't specify that /var/run and /var/lock may be volatile ref rcS(5)

2009-02-16 Thread Tim Small
Colin Watson wrote: Tim was referring to the text of the FHS, though (see the subject line), which I don't think we ought to modify in debian-policy for this. Yes, sorry about that, I hadn't appreciated that the FHS is independent of Debian.. Your proposed change to policy looks good. I

Bug#514326: debian-policy: fhs-2.3 doesn't specify that /var/run and /var/lock may be volatile ref rcS(5)

2009-02-15 Thread Ian Jackson
Tim Small writes (Bug#514326: debian-policy: fhs-2.3 doesn't specify that /var/run and /var/lock may be volatile ref rcS(5)): It should not be assumed that the contents of this directory will persist after a system reboot. I second this suggestion. Does Tim's proposed phrasing make it

Bug#514326: debian-policy: fhs-2.3 doesn't specify that /var/run and /var/lock may be volatile ref rcS(5)

2009-02-06 Thread Tim Small
Package: debian-policy Version: 3.8.0.1 Severity: wishlist Tags: patch The requirements for /var/run and var/lock don't specify that the contents of these directories may be volatile (e.g. ramdisk based, as happens if you enable the RAMRUN option in /etc/default/rcS). Some packages assume that