Text in fstab page about /dev/shm

Dan Nicholson dbn.lists at gmail.com
Wed Feb 22 18:51:09 PST 2006

On 2/22/06, Chris Staub <chris at beaker67.com> wrote:
> I don't really know much of anything about the subject myself, but it
> seems strange that it says /dev/shm is "optional" when it's described as
> required during the LFS system build. Is that paragraph simply out-of-date?

I don't know much about the subject either, Chris.  Here's the thread
for the original flame war that resulted in that wording, though:


Maybe someone who understands the uses of SysV shared memory can shed
some light on the current situation.


More information about the cross-lfs mailing list