On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 18:30:51 +0100, Simon McVittie <s...@debian.org> wrote: >On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 at 14:22:31 +0200, Marc Haber wrote: >> On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 12:01:13 +0100, Simon McVittie <s...@debian.org> >> wrote: >> >(systemd cannot create a mount point that doesn't exist yet on a read-only >> >file system, which is why a zero-byte file is preferred. >> >> but you can bind-mount over a file? I wasn't aware of that. > >Yes, you can bind-mount a directory over another directory, or a >non-directory non-symlink over another non-directory non-symlink.
I wasn't aware of that. How neat. >bubblewrap and other container-runners often use this when setting >up containers - for example if you have a Flatpak app installed, try >something like > > flatpak run --command=mount org.gnome.Recipes > >and you'll see that the container's /etc is a mixture of read-only >bind-mounts from the host system and read-only bind-mounts from the >runtime, some of which are individual files. That must be a horrible clutter in mtab though. >> >> >Maybe /etc/machine-id should be part of the "API" of a Debian system in >> >> >general (systemd or not)? >> >> So /etc/machine-id should be in Policy? > >Probably yes, if that proposal has consensus, although a prerequisite >for it being in Policy would be to have an implementation of making it >exist even on systems with neither systemd nor dbus installed (Policy >is meant to document what's true, not what we hope will become true). We should also have a document containing what we want to have in the future, such as a comprehensive roadmap. The absence of leadership in this regard is probably one of the reasons why we have lost so much momentum in adopting new technology. Greetings Marc -- -------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! ----- Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " | Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834
