| From: | The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Oliver Elphick <olly(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk>, Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: Sure enough, the lock file is gone |
| Date: | 2001-01-29 01:37:56 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.BSF.4.31.0101282137070.9459-100000@thelab.hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, 28 Jan 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Oliver Elphick" <olly(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> > No, UNIX sockets are specifically mentioned as belonging under /var/run.
> > In section 5.10 "/var/run : Run-time variable data", it says: "Programs
> > that maintain transient UNIX-domain sockets should place them in this
> > directory."
>
> > So what ever the outcome for the wider PostgreSQL community, I must make
> > the change to conform to Debian policy.
>
> Just out of curiosity, does Debian enforce a nonstandard location for
> X sockets as well?
Just curious here ... there seems to have been *alot* of energy expended
on this ... is there any reason why we don't just have a configuration
option like other software has, that defaults to /tmp like we have it now,
but that makes it easier for others to change it for their installs, as
required?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Lamar Owen | 2001-01-29 02:48:47 | Re: Re: Sure enough, the lock file is gone |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-01-29 01:11:34 | Re: Re: Sure enough, the lock file is gone |