Re: New shmfs and Debian
On Tue, Apr 04, 2000 at 04:33:47PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> Lawrence Walton wrote:
> > Some think /var/shm, others /dev/shm, and still others /shm.
> > I think /shm is the simplest least intrusive.
>
> Please explain how adding
> yet-another-useless-top-level-directory-in-direct-violation-of-fhs-and-fsstnd
> is "less intrusive" than burying it somewhere where you won't stumble over
> it every day?
And I presume that /var/shm has been checked out with the FHS team?
(See section 5 of that document about generally not adding top-level
directories in /var.)
Julian
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, QMW, Univ. of London. J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk
Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see http://www.debian.org/~jdg
Donate free food to the world's hungry: see http://www.thehungersite.com/
Reply to: