[arch-general] /srv/ vs. /home/httpd/html
I know this change has been running for some time now, but out of curiousity i'd like to know why it's been descided to put phpmyadmin/apache stuff in a new root folder called /srv/ instead of /home/* Isn't this a very personal setup compared to having this in the already existing /home/ folder? And not to forget that the change created a great deal of extra work for users who has been using /home/.. /srv/ must have some hidden important stability boosts?? And please don't get me wrong, i don't really care, since i have most of these folders mounted the way i want them, im still going to rebuild these packages and more using abs. Im just curious... -JK
I'd guess it's because that is what is recommended by the FHS: http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#SRVDATAFORSERVICESPROVIDEDBYSYS... I kind of like having it separate, and think it makes sense, even though that's not what I've always been used to. It's definitely a more consistent and centralized location to store things that are served by the system. -- Aaron "ElasticDog" Schaefer On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 10:07 AM, Jon Kristian Nilsen <jokr.nilsen@gmail.com> wrote:
I know this change has been running for some time now, but out of curiousity i'd like to know why it's been descided to put phpmyadmin/apache stuff in a new root folder called /srv/ instead of /home/* Isn't this a very personal setup compared to having this in the already existing /home/ folder? And not to forget that the change created a great deal of extra work for users who has been using /home/..
/srv/ must have some hidden important stability boosts?? And please don't get me wrong, i don't really care, since i have most of these folders mounted the way i want them, im still going to rebuild these packages and more using abs.
Im just curious...
-JK
Ok, thanks for clearing this up. On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 2:24 PM, Aaron Schaefer <aaron@elasticdog.com>wrote:
I'd guess it's because that is what is recommended by the FHS:
http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#SRVDATAFORSERVICESPROVIDEDBYSYS...
I kind of like having it separate, and think it makes sense, even though that's not what I've always been used to. It's definitely a more consistent and centralized location to store things that are served by the system.
-- Aaron "ElasticDog" Schaefer
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 10:07 AM, Jon Kristian Nilsen <jokr.nilsen@gmail.com> wrote:
I know this change has been running for some time now, but out of curiousity i'd like to know why it's been descided to put phpmyadmin/apache stuff in a new root folder called /srv/ instead of /home/* Isn't this a very personal setup compared to having this in the already existing /home/ folder? And not to forget that the change created a great deal of extra work for users who has been using /home/..
/srv/ must have some hidden important stability boosts?? And please don't get me wrong, i don't really care, since i have most of these folders mounted the way i want them, im still going to rebuild these packages and more using abs.
Im just curious...
-JK
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 9:24 AM, Aaron Schaefer <aaron@elasticdog.com> wrote:
I'd guess it's because that is what is recommended by the FHS:
http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#SRVDATAFORSERVICESPROVIDEDBYSYS...
I kind of like having it separate, and think it makes sense, even though that's not what I've always been used to. It's definitely a more consistent and centralized location to store things that are served by the system.
An additional note, directories in /home imply that there is a user by that name. /home/http or /home/sites or something is a little goofy if you don't have users named "http" and/or "sites". Nothing says there *must* be users for those dirs, but that's just the way /home was intended to work.
participants (3)
-
Aaron Griffin
-
Aaron Schaefer
-
Jon Kristian Nilsen