On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 05:10:05PM +0000, Colin Booth wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 06:23:55PM +0300, Peter Pentchev wrote:
> > There may be a bit of a misconception or miscommunication here.
> > On Linux systems, /run is practically certaion to be mounted on
> > a tmpfs of some kind: its explicit purpose is to be volatile,
> > for this boot only. It is similar to /var/run, but one of its main
> > advantages is that it will always be cleaned upon boot.
> > See e.g. https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/FHS_3.0/fhs/ch03s15.html
> On most modern systems /var/run is a symlink to /run (or ../run, which
> is the same in practice) so they aren't similar but in fact identical.
> Other than that everything you said is 100% spot on, using anything
> run-related will result in data loss on reboot.
Of course you're right :) The way I worded it was mainly because of
the fact that I'm kind of old, and I meant something more like
"it was originally designed as an equivalent to the concept of
the /var/run already existing in pretty much all Unix-like systems".
But yeah, since most programs generally already assumed that anything
stored under /var/run was not necessarily guaranteed to survive
a reboot, the symlink was easy to introduce.
G'luck,
Peter
--
Peter Pentchev roam_at_ringlet.net roam_at_debian.org peter_at_morpheusly.com
PGP key: https://www.ringlet.net/roam/roam.key.asc
Key fingerprint 2EE7 A7A5 17FC 124C F115 C354 651E EFB0 2527 DF13
Received on Wed Sep 17 2025 - 23:50:34 CEST