/srv/http/ or /srv/www/ ?

ravster · 2008-08-31 19:21:01

Hi,
lighttpd (and apache too, I think) have their default document roots in /srv/http.
phpmyadmin (and mediawiki from aur) install their files in /srv/www .

How do we solve this itty-bitty problem?
1 - symlink /srv/www and /srv/http - I think this is an ugly hack.

2 - Set up an Arch policy that says that one or the other should be used - I think this is bureaucratic, but better since we know that there is a particular pat to follow.

So, people. What do all of you think should be done about this?
Thanks.

InsektO · 2008-08-31 19:45:54

I got phpmyadmin folder from abs, then simply edited phpmyadmin PKGBUILD replacing /srv/www with srv/http. And that was enough, everything is working fine.

Last edited by InsektO (2008-08-31 19:47:59)

phrakture · 2008-09-04 21:55:23

Please file a bug report for the phpmyadmin packager. It should probably install to /usr/share or something and symlink to /srv/www

Pierre · 2008-09-04 22:27:50

Right, /usr/share is the right place for such arch-independent scripts. No package should install files to /srv. Its up to the user to create symlinks or aliases from /usr/share to /srv/http.

The policy for /srv should be /srv/<protocoll name>. E.g. ftp, http etc..

marxav · 2008-09-04 23:05:45

Pierre wrote:

Right, /usr/share is the right place for such arch-independent scripts. No package should install files to /srv. Its up to the user to create symlinks or aliases from /usr/share to /srv/http.
The policy for /srv should be /srv/<protocoll name>. E.g. ftp, http etc..

I did time quite some time ago... http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=51739. It was decided it is not a bug.

zenlord · 2008-09-05 15:54:40

I requested to reopen that bug based on this thread: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/10920

Zl.

sergej · 2008-09-06 08:07:52

But what I should do with configs, data directories etc? I do not think that they should be placed in /usr/share...

Pierre · 2008-09-06 09:52:47

config files should go to /etc.

remote · 2008-09-07 19:07:15

Plus if able go back to the old standard of having full paths in config files.
Old: "Good practice."
# Various default settings
Include /etc/httpd/conf/extra/httpd-default.conf
New: "Bad idea."
# Various default settings
Include conf/extra/httpd-default.conf

Thanks for your time and Take Care!

ravster · 2008-09-08 00:14:54

Ok, thank you all for the posts.

I've just had a look at the re-opened bug report, and it seems that Sergej's recommendation is to use a symlink in the webserver's document root that points to wherever the package files are installed by pacman (Egs: '/srv/www/phpMyAdmin' or '/srv/http/mediawiki').

Please let me know if my interpretation is accurate.
Thank you.

sergej · 2008-09-08 10:24:00

...or create a virtual directories in web server.

ravster · 2008-09-08 13:05:00

This is the first time in years that I've done anything with a web server, sorry.

Are you talking about using aliases?

Thanks, Sergej

Arch Linux

#1 2008-08-31 19:21:01

/srv/http/ or /srv/www/ ?

#2 2008-08-31 19:45:54

Re: /srv/http/ or /srv/www/ ?

#3 2008-09-04 21:55:23

Re: /srv/http/ or /srv/www/ ?

#4 2008-09-04 22:27:50

Re: /srv/http/ or /srv/www/ ?

#5 2008-09-04 23:05:45

Re: /srv/http/ or /srv/www/ ?

#6 2008-09-05 15:54:40

Re: /srv/http/ or /srv/www/ ?

#7 2008-09-06 08:07:52

Re: /srv/http/ or /srv/www/ ?

#8 2008-09-06 09:52:47

Re: /srv/http/ or /srv/www/ ?

#9 2008-09-07 19:07:15

Re: /srv/http/ or /srv/www/ ?

#10 2008-09-08 00:14:54

Re: /srv/http/ or /srv/www/ ?

#11 2008-09-08 10:24:00

Re: /srv/http/ or /srv/www/ ?

#12 2008-09-08 13:05:00

Re: /srv/http/ or /srv/www/ ?

Board footer