From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FAD31388F0 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 21:38:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B01CD21C015; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 21:37:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from homiemail-a58.g.dreamhost.com (caibbdcaaaaf.dreamhost.com [208.113.200.5]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECBC221C006 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 21:37:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from homiemail-a58.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a58.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 030EE7D805B for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 13:38:01 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=libertytrek.org; h= message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= libertytrek.org; bh=dGv1+xLwfAIQYXCxwgMf8nAit7U=; b=KKAFPMHSH+Ts 1llkdOSGL6j/p9xSjrPQhlEz81nKq4/bnIManWFRd4zFRS6/n1Gb6BIN4Cu1UX8m 6MoBbM/oGxjkregkZ8kqAav7x2bnHe34um4ARGkKPcrOaVpNRL1+ayyNr36rvnAz 5byoU4SurgZam9c23B8g3qFyxY40VQM= Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [159.63.145.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: tanstaafl@libertytrek.org) by homiemail-a58.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B88317D806A for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 13:37:56 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <51141E97.3080304@libertytrek.org> Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 16:37:27 -0500 From: Tanstaafl User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] udev-191 bit me. Insufficient ptys References: <20130203185145.4008d87f@weird.wonkology.org> <5113E717.7020402@libertytrek.org> <201302071753.56717.peter@humphrey.ukfsn.org> <51141466.3030109@libertytrek.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 4934bd2b-4a1f-476b-aa8e-64f80cb01a86 X-Archives-Hash: db428a009e258be3d7e6cf3db3c871b4 On 2013-02-07 4:25 PM, Paul Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: >> I think that a lot of people will misread that like I (we) did... > I believe he is correct and /dev/shm is irrelevant for this discussion. Ok, thanks, but... and no offense... I am not willing to gamble on breaking a remotely accessed server based on someone's 'I believe that this is correct' comment. When the news item says: > need to verify the fstype for possible /dev line in /etc/fstab is > devtmpfs (and not, for example, tmpfs) 'Possible /dev line' in no way is clear that it means a line that has ONLY /dev on it. /dev/shm - which is also of type tmpfs - can easily be read to be included. > The important thing to note is that entries for precisely /dev and > /proc Mine has this in it: > # NOTE: The next line is critical for boot! > none /proc proc defaults 0 0 So, you're saying that this line, that is prefaced with a comment that says it is CRITICAL FOR BOOT, is not even needed? This is a server that was initially installed back in 2005, so maybe this is cruft that is no longer needed? Obviously I don't understand most of this stuff, so am at the mercy of those more knowledgeable. Thanks, Charles