Subject: Re: /dev/log -> /var/run/logsocket
To: Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU>
From: Luke Mewburn <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 01/03/1999 16:54:23
Robert Elz writes:
> | why isn't .pid a solution?
> Because I personally detest typing files by "extension". We have directories.
> Directories are cheap and easy to use. We ought use them more. This is
> neither VMS nor DOS. One directory to keep files containing pids, another
> to contain "re-create after reboot" system database type things, and yet
> another to hold unix domain sockets for communication with daemons is not
> at all an unreasonable thing to ask.
> ps: the ".pid" thing is a personal preference, when run was created, it was
> to remove all the /etc/*.pid files out of /etc - while the .pid stuff could
> have been removed at that time, it wasn't.
it seems that a few non pidfiles have now invaded /var/run. i'm
interested in the idea of having all the pidfiles in one place.
since you'd have to recompile code to support /var/run/foo (instead of
/var/run/foo.pid), why not create `/var/run/pid/' and put all the
pidfiles under there (sans the `.pid' suffix)?
this solve's kre's requirement of have a directory just for pidfiles
(which as a concept, i can see merit in).
since he has to recompile code anyway (to remove the .pid extension),
i can't see a problem. except maybe, for third-party code which does
autoconf magic to detect if /var/run or /etc should be used for a
pidfile (for example, i have code which does this. i can change it,