On Mon, 2008-07-21 at 07:46 -0500, William Pitcock wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-07-21 at 13:26 +0200, Gabor Gombas wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 02:55:25AM +0100, Stephen Gran wrote:
> >
> > > Yes. My webservers tend to use something like
> > > /srv/www/<sitename>/{config,cgi-bin,htdocs,lib,logs,blah,blah}/ as the
> > > normal layout. Exposing /srv/www as a document root would give access to
> > > lots of things that are not public in many cases - we tend to not bother
> > > with .htaccess files since config/ and so on are not under the webroot.
> >
> > You're not alone with such a setup. /srv is becoming popular exactly
> > because it does not conflict with the OS.
Agree.
In a few years from now, many packages will have migrated their stuffs
from /var/lib/* to /srv/$1/localhost/.
At that time, the whole benefit of /srv being a clean location would be
voided.
> I would say that the redhat default of /srv/www/localhost/htdocs might
> be a good option.
BTW, My preferred scheme is more like /srv/localhost/www/htdocs (as it
allows to easily synchronize /srv/localhost/* ).
Franklin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
