From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JGN7r-0003v2-Vt for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 19 Jan 2008 23:29:24 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 13983E00DA; Sat, 19 Jan 2008 23:29:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dspnet.fr.eu.org (dspnet.fr.eu.org [213.186.44.138]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2D8FE00DA for ; Sat, 19 Jan 2008 23:29:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: by dspnet.fr.eu.org (Postfix, from userid 1007) id DA1BBA49AC; Sun, 20 Jan 2008 00:29:20 +0100 (CET) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 00:29:20 +0100 From: Olivier Galibert To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Concerns about WIPE_TMP change Message-ID: <20080119232920.GA17770@dspnet.fr.eu.org> References: <479156FF.5030508@xs4all.nl> <20080119021236.GO10389@aerie.halcy0n.com> <4791F359.1050500@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-Archives-Salt: e4593c7b-947f-409d-b7ab-9177980d5efd X-Archives-Hash: 1ca4c0962d426b85f512f5e970ff1266 On Sat, Jan 19, 2008 at 10:18:35PM +0000, Duncan wrote: > Richard Freeman posted 4791F359.1050500@gentoo.org, > excerpted below, on Sat, 19 Jan 2008 07:55:53 -0500: > > > 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. > > Obscure? It's the directory name (says another with both /tmp and /var/ > tmp on tmpfs). How much less obscure can you get than announcing it > every time the path is referenced or specified? Who could reasonably > argue that tmp doesn't mean tmp? Tmp has never meant "erase at restart", because restarts are often not predictable. Tmp has sometimes meant things like "erased after a week", or "erased when space gets low", but never "erased after restart" which is just unusable. Frankly, if I'm writing a long email (which mutt stores in /tmp) and a powerloss makes it gone even if I was saving it from time to time while I was writing it, I'll get annoyed. Severely annoyed. It's just another bug of the FHS that shoule be ignored. OG. -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list