On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 08:27:43PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> On 05.07.2012 20:18, Steve Langasek wrote:
> >> We've implemented /run despite it not being in the FHS.
> > We've implemented /run, as a special exception approved in Debian Policy,
> > for those bits of the filesystem previously st
On 05.07.2012 20:18, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> We've implemented /run despite it not being in the FHS.
>
> We've implemented /run, as a special exception approved in Debian Policy,
> for those bits of the filesystem previously stored in /var/run and
> /var/lock. No such exception has been granted
On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 07:34:21PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> On 05.07.2012 19:12, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Package: udisks2
> > Version: 1.98.0-2
> > Severity: serious
> > Justification: FHS
> > udisks2 has taken to mounting user filesystems under /run/media. This
> > directly contradicts th
On 05.07.2012 19:12, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Package: udisks2
> Version: 1.98.0-2
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FHS
>
> udisks2 has taken to mounting user filesystems under /run/media. This
> directly contradicts the FHS, which says /media is to be used for mounting
> removeable media.
>
Package: udisks2
Version: 1.98.0-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FHS
udisks2 has taken to mounting user filesystems under /run/media. This
directly contradicts the FHS, which says /media is to be used for mounting
removeable media.
This is therefore a serious policy violation in the udisks2 p
5 matches
Mail list logo
