On Fri, 4 May 2012 03:37:05 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:

> > In my completely uninformed guess... a) tmpfs automatically 'cleans
> > up' every reboot, making sure old folders aren't sitting around stale
> > even if something did go wrong, and/or b) it's guaranteed writable for
> > the service that needs to make those mount points. I could probably
> > come up with a 'c', but I'd likely have to actually do a bit of
> > reading on the topic before rising looking even more foolishly un-read
> > on the topic than I already do! :-P
> >   
> 
> Here you go, one time c):
> 
> /run can be guaranteed to exist immediately after / is mounted, which
> fixes a whole slew of really horrible problems if it isn't.

But it cannot be guaranteed that / is mounted rw at this time, so /run o
tmpfs makes sense from that perspective. However, it is an illogical place
to mount removable devices, whereas the function of /media is immediately
obvious from its name. The link given indicates that systemd was already
mounting /media as a tmpfs, is it really worth switching to an
unintuitive location for the mountpoints just to save one tmpfs which
uses so little resources?


-- 
Neil Bothwick

If Bill Gates had a dime for every time a Windows box crashed...
 ...Oh, wait a minute, he already does.