Le jeu, 03/06/2004 Ã 08:46 -0500, Chris Adams a Ãcrit : > Once upon a time, Phil Knirsch <pknirsch@xxxxxxxxxx> said: > > I came up with a small list of packages that, due to the change in the > > latest FHS-2.3 and the addition of /srv and /media would seem likely > > candidates for partiall data migration to /srv: > > I think this new top-level directory is doomed to failure. For one > thing, for a well set-up server, you'll need /srv to be on a separate > partition from /. Since you already need separate partitions for /usr, > /var, /home, /tmp, and (in some places) /usr/local, you really don't > want a new top-level directory. The first thing I'd probably do is make > /srv a symlink to /var/srv, /usr/local/srv, or some such. On a well set-up server you *already* have something that serves as /srv/, except it is not standard and a PITA to maintain (some apps use /home/something, others /var/www, /var/export, /var/lib/ other dump stuff in opt etc) I would be a big relief to have a standard place to dump all user data files (ftp/http/cifs/databases/mails) instead of the current mess. Of course it will take time to be adopted. Of course it will involve compat symlinks for a few years. But you know you could have made this very same argument three years ago and I'd have now a clean solution instead of looking forward at perpetuating compat symlinks for the next servers I'll set up this year. Some form of srv is needed. Maybe not on big dedicated servers, but all small multipurpose departemental servers you feel the pain of apps not agreeing where the big data partition is supposed to live. Regrads, -- Nicolas Mailhot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
