On Thu, 2009-02-19 at 09:29 +, amedee wrote:
> If you ever encounter other issues related to /var/log (or /var/tmp
> or /var/run), the you can mark them as a duplicate of this one.
>
We specifically support /var/run and /var/lock being on tmpfs, we also
specifically support /dev and /tmp.
N
Scott,
Thank you for explaining. I find it very considerate of you that you have taken
the time.
It seems that my initial reading of the FHS may have been a bit superficial.
I now understand your point of view, and I agree with the status of wontfix.
However, I will try to locate a relevant docum
On Wed, 2009-02-18 at 16:12 +, amedee wrote:
> I disagree that the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (FHS) explicitly does
> not permit /var/log to be on a tmpfs.
>
When it comes to the FHS, if it is not explicitly permitted, then
distributions are free not to support it.
Basically nothing suppo
Hello Scott,
Thank you for your reaction.
I disagree that the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (FHS) explicitly does
not permit /var/log to be on a tmpfs.
Grepping on tmpfs and on tmp in the current version (2.3) of the FHS
gives the following results:
ame...@intrepid { ~ }$ curl http://www.pathnam
