Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 826780
package installs /var/run/setroubleshoot directory
Last modified: 2013-01-28 15:23:26 EST
Description of problem:
/var/run is a symlink to /run, which is mounted as tmpfs on systemd. rpms shouldn't reference files there
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Is this a fedora decision or just your opinion?
(In reply to comment #1)
> Is this a fedora decision or just your opinion?
I don't understand what you mean ... I found the similar bug 748153 for a different package so I assumed it's a bug. To me, it seems not to make sense to include files in packages that would be stored on tmpfs? Perhaps together with %ghost, as discussed in bug 656638? But the package doesn't do that, either.
I think you will find lots of packages that include content in /var/run, perhaps because it was not always a tmpfs, but it also allows us to create the directory at install time, and with the correct label.
I was asking if there is a new directive within Fedora to remove /var/run and replace /run within spec files. Or just to eliminate reference to /run directory.
On my f18 machine I see 48 files/dir in /var/run owned by packages.
rpm -qf /var/run/*| grep -v owned | wc -l
Maybe some of these are ghosts.
Could you send a note to fedora-devel with a suggestion to remove these, and see what people say.
(In reply to comment #3)
> I was asking if there is a new directive within Fedora to remove /var/run
> and replace /run within spec files. Or just to eliminate reference to /run
Ah, ok. Sorry. I didn't want to suggest that /var/run should be replaced by /run. I wanted to stress that anything you place inside /var/run will ultimately be stored on a tmpfs. So just ignore the "/var/run is a symlink to /run" part.
Given bug 656638, I suppose the official directive is to include such files, but with %ghost?
> I think you will find lots of packages that include content in /var/run,
> perhaps because it was not always a tmpfs, but it also allows us to create
> the directory at install time, and with the correct label.
Yes, but it will be gone after the next reboot, so it's pretty pointless.
> Could you send a note to fedora-devel with a suggestion to remove these, and
> see what people say.
Bug 656638 ("mass bug filing") seems to imply that this has been discussed alreay. Perhaps you should better ask Lennart Poettering about it. I added him to CC.
Ah I now see that according to bug 656688, %ghost should already be in place. Well, anyway, I noticed that rpm -Va reports /var/run/setroubleshoot as missing on my system. Is this directory actually needed as a runtime directory, or is it created only as a temp directory? Does it use this directory at all?
Actually now that I look at it, we are no longer using /run/setroubleshoot or /var/log/setroubleshoot.
Fixed in setroubleshoot-3.1.12-1.fc17