[systemd-devel] PrivateDevices with more than basic set of devices?

Topi Miettinen toiwoton at gmail.com
Tue Jan 27 13:59:08 PST 2015

On 01/27/15 21:35, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Tue, 27.01.15 21:32, Topi Miettinen (toiwoton at gmail.com) wrote:
>> On 01/27/15 20:48, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>>> On Tue, 27.01.15 19:04, Topi Miettinen (toiwoton at gmail.com) wrote:
>>>> On 01/26/15 23:46, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>>>>>> But independently of the PrivateDevices thing, would you think
>>>>>> tmpfiles.d could be extended to be usable for unit specific cases
>>>>>> instead of just one global setup? I think there could be more uses, for
>>>>>> example, creating directories and links inside a unit's
>>>>>> RuntimeDirectory.
>>>>> I am not sure how this could work and what kind of integration you
>>>>> precisely are looking for there?
>>>>> Note that tmpfiles exists mostly for two reasons: a) to deal with old
>>>>> software that wasn't capable of creating its own subdirs/stuff below
>>>>> its runtime directory; and b) to deal with software whose main program
>>>>> was running unpriviliged all the time (for example by using User=),
>>>>> and hence lacked the priviliges to set up its subdir in /run.
>>>> a) was exactly my case, auditd doesn't have a way to specify where to
>>>> put the pid file yet, so it ends up in /run/auditd.pid.
>>> Hmm, but that's fine, no? What would you put in tmpfiles for auditd?
>> I'd want it to put the pid file somewhere else, like RuntimeDirectory.
>> L    /run/auditd.pid -    -    -    -   /run/auditd/auditd.pid
>> This is probably a bad example as pid files could be deleted by the
>> daemon at exit.
> I think it would be better to fix this in auditd itself and make it
> use a proper dir below /run, rather than store its stuff in /run
> itself...

Fully agree.


> Lennart

More information about the systemd-devel mailing list