Re: [gentoo-dev] Confusing tmpfs information in udev news item

2013-01-25 Thread Pacho Ramos
El vie, 25-01-2013 a las 14:22 -0500, Rich Freeman escribió: > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote: > > Does it apply to /dev/shm? That is the line I have in my fstab: > > shm /dev/shmtmpfs > > nodev,nosuid,noexec 0 0 > > No. It applies ONLY to /dev

Re: [gentoo-dev] Confusing tmpfs information in udev news item

2013-01-25 Thread Rich Freeman
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote: > Does it apply to /dev/shm? That is the line I have in my fstab: > shm /dev/shmtmpfs > nodev,nosuid,noexec 0 0 No. It applies ONLY to /dev - if you even have a /dev line, and if you don't that is OK. Rich

[gentoo-dev] Confusing tmpfs information in udev news item

2013-01-25 Thread Pacho Ramos
I got today the udev news item and found: - "The need of CONFIG_DEVTMPFS=y in the kernel; need to verify the fstype for possible /dev line in /etc/fstab is devtmpfs (and not, for example, tmpfs)" Does it apply to /dev/shm? That is the line I have in my fstab: shm /dev/shm