On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:28:11 -0600
Lamont Peterson <lamont(a)gurulabs.com> wrote:
> we can't prepopulate it with anything,
Why not? I have yet to see a single, viable argument on this list to
explain why having /srv/web/ or /srv/ftp/ can't work as a starting
point for a distribution nor for Fedora. Don't get me wrong, there
have been a few ideas put forth, but so far, none of them have held
water.
Because the FHS is broken on this issue. They claim that it's for site
admins to use and distributions can't layout any files that may
disrupt or overwrite what a site admin may already have in place.
> and we can't assume what the
> local admin will use for a scheme. /srv/<site>/{web,ftp,backup}
> or /srv/{web,ftp,backup}/<site> or some other combo.
What does it matter? If someone is going to change /var/www/
and /var/ftp/ and others to a per-site organization, they're already
doing something different from what is default on any UNIX or
UNIX-like OS that I know of.
Besides, SELinux won't care. You simply assign the right types to
the per-site www/, ftp/, etc. directories and it will just work.
Yes, I know, the parent directory structure will still have to allow
those services to get there, too; again, if someone is reorganizing
"against-the-grain," then they'll have to deal with that either way.
Wrong, see Steve's mail.
--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours?