Am 03.08.2011 20:14, schrieb Evan Broder: > On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Klaus Lichtenwalder > <k lichtenwalder computer org> wrote: >> Am 03.08.2011 20:07, schrieb Michał Górny: >>> On Wed, 03 Aug 2011 20:01:15 +0200 >>> Klaus Lichtenwalder <k lichtenwalder computer org> wrote: >> [...] >>>> And your and other peoples reasons are more than valid. So, I think >>>> the most nonintrusive way would be to have a symbolic link to probably >>>> /var/run/resolv.conf, which would also work if the file isn't there... >>>> It could belong to a group with members that are allowed to write >>>> there. Dhcp, MM, ppp probably... >>> >>> As I mentioned earlier, symlink is no solution but a workaround >>> introducing further breakage possibilities. Most importantly it won't >>> allow you to have fallback /etc/resolv.conf. And the symlink will be >>> invalid if one uses separate /var and /var hasn't been mounted yet. >> >> Yeah, I've been posting too early for your argument, and you're right. I >> don't think /var not being mounted will be a problem (haven't thought it >> through, though), because that's so early in the boot process that name >> resolution might not yet be a problem. (Network probably isn't up either). > > This is exactly what /run was created for, so why not call it > /run/resolv.conf instead of /var/run and avoid that problem entirely? > Well, /run is very new, from debian, if I recall correctly... So, yes, on one way we want something (very) new, I don't know whether the semantics for /run are fixed. Or /run is accepted widely enough? Klaus -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Klaus Lichtenwalder, Dipl. Inform., http://www.lichtenwalder.name PGP Key fingerprint: BF52 72FA 1F5A 1E29 C0F8 498C C4C6 633C 2821 97DA
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature