

Ubuntu 11.10, Introduce new top-level directory /run - nexusz99
http://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/RunDirectory

======
AdamGibbins
It's actually an alteration to the Linux Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (FHS)
that most distros are adopting (all likely will in the future). Nothing
specifically to do with Ubuntu.

It was introduced in 3.0 of the standards:
[https://www.linux.com/learn/tutorials/476610-a-look-at-
the-f...](https://www.linux.com/learn/tutorials/476610-a-look-at-the-
filesystem-hierarchy-standard-30)

~~~
drats
It says that in the main article.

------
elehack
It's an interesting run-down of the new Debian and Fedora feature (and a very
good change IMO), but the title is misleading - what does the linked article
have to do with Ubuntu, 11.10 or otherwise?

~~~
wiredfool
Because it shipped in Ubuntu 11.10. (And, there was a bug that didn't fully
transition some systems over that would cause a crash on boot).

~~~
sbayless
Do you think you could you link to that bug? I just upgraded to 11.10, I don't
have a /run directory, and I did have some boot problems that I worked around.
(A google search didn't turn anything up.)

Edit: My mistake, after rebooting, this folder popped right up :)

~~~
shareme
hmm I upgraded and yes do have it..

did you upgrade from 11.04 or lower ?

------
adamrmcd

      > Why do we need /run?
      > 
      > There is a need for a writable location to store data
      > during early boot, before / is made writable (and it
      > might be read only even during normal operation).
      > Currently, no cross-distribution standardized location
      > exists for this purpose. Debian uses /lib/init/rw; Ubuntu
      > apparently does some very complex stuff linking /var/run
      > to /lib/init/rw and using showthrough mounts. Other
      > distributions do their own thing. Several programs chose
      > not to use /lib/init/rw due to it being non-standard, and
      > continued to use /dev/.foo due to udev mounting a tmpfs
      > there which could be abused as a data store during early
      > boot. /run provides a standard place for these use cases.
    

So, this is one of those "no user-serviceable parts inside" changes. The
purpose is only for developers during bootup.

Would be good, but, let me know if FHS actually accepts this.
<http://www.pathname.com/fhs/>

~~~
ominous_prime
IIRC, this was hashed out and accepted months ago, but is only now starting to
see use in new releases.

I for one, was impressed by the decision. Unlike what often happens when
multiple distros are involved, everyone seemed come to a consensus quickly,
and said "let's make it happen".

------
demetris
Previous discussion:

Introducing /run (lwn.net) — <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2387495>

------
saljam
/run has been in Debian unstable for quite a while now actually, at least 3-4
months. /var/run is just a symlink. I think this is related to the systemd
stuff.

Personally, the first thing I do when I install a Linux is write a simple
/etc/rc script which mounts filesystems and launches daemons. No /etc/init.d/*
start stop stuff, no /run. The result is almost always _simpler_ and _faster_.
My thinkpad takes 3 seconds from bootloader to X11.

~~~
dfc
I have never understood the fixation on boot time.

~~~
saljam
Simplicity was my main point. The fact that it was faster just followed. As a
matter of fact I haven't rebooted this machine in about 3 weeks.

~~~
dfc
How do you handle dependencies? One of the slickest things about debian
boot/init is resolvconf populating dnscache's list of dns servers with the
dhcp reply. I love that. I'd wait a minute extra just for that.

------
endeavor
Good stuff. Nice to see different the groups come together standardize this.

------
antimora
I am running Ubuntu 11.10, and it seems that manual pages for "hier" are not
updated.

    
    
       man hier

------
sherkund
This shit makes me wish Gobolinux could have a chance against a behemoth like
Ubuntu.

~~~
rmc
Shit? What do you think is bad about the /run?

~~~
sherkund
That it is an incremental fix for a terrible ad-hoc file-system design that
has invaded almost all Linux distributions.

You still can't easily install 2 versions of a program in Debian. It's 2011.

~~~
jrockway

        ./configure --prefix=/some/unique/place

~~~
calpaterson
His point is that dpkg is unable to support installation of multiple versions
of a package. update-alternatives and having custom packaging (like with
python2.6 and python2.7) solves some of this issue, but Gobolinux deals with
it a lot better

~~~
jrockway
My point is that it's very easy to do this, but that no real users of Debian
want it enough to begin doing it.

~~~
calpaterson
"Real" users? What does that even mean?

