Oops, I think I goofed. I should have clarified that
these are for my LOCAL sites. All my online sites are
insisde a folder named public_html.
Do your comments still stand - is it a good idea to
put my websites inside folders named public_html even
on my computer?
Thanks.
--- John Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David Blomstrom wrote:
> > This is how most of my virtual hosts are set up:
> >
> > <VirtualHost *:80>
> > ServerName geoworld
> > ServerAlias geoworld *.geoworld
> > DocumentRoot c:\sites\geoworld
> > </VirtualHost>
> >
> > However, I read somewhere that it's better to put
> your
> > sites inside a folder named public_html, then set
> up
> > your virtual host like this:
> >
> > <VirtualHost *:80>
> > ServerName geozoo
> > ServerAlias geozoo *.geozoo
> > DocumentRoot c:\sites\geozoo\public_html
> > </VirtualHost>
> >
> > Can anyone tell me if that's better and why? I've
> set
> > a couple sites up like that, and everything seems
> to
> > work OK, but I don't want to go to the trouble of
> > changing all my sites if there's no real
> advantage.
>
> The second alternative is probably better for most
> installations.
>
> Remember that any file that lies under the document
> root is potentially
> visible to all the world. Any files that will never
> be served via Apache
> should not be under the document root. Having that
> extra layer of
> directories gives you more flexibility in organizing
> and controlling
> your files.
>
> Of course there's no reason why the document root
> needs to be called
> 'public_html' in particular.
____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
" from the digest: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
