> > Why not just have /tmp a separate FS?
>
> I don't see any advantage of that over linking /tmp to /var/tmp. The
> only issue with not having /tmp on the root filesystem is if it's
> needed before the rest of the filesystems are mounted, and you'd have
> the same problem with a separate /tmp or a symlink.
I have a vague recollection of a distinction between /tmp and /var/tmp,
where /tmp was for very small or zero-length files with a short life time,
and /var/tmp was for large or long-life data. That way /tmp could stay on
the root fs, or a small ramdisk, or use tmpfs, without worrying about it
sucking too much space. The problem is that applications would need to know
about this, and AFAIK they don't.
Are we off-topic yet? :)
-- Plug-and-Play is really nice, unfortunately it only works 50% of the time. To be specific the "Plug" almost always works. --unknown source- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/