/srv?

Bruce Dubbs bdubbs at swbell.net
Thu Jul 15 07:03:03 PDT 2004


Mark A. Friedman wrote:

> Dagmar d'Surreal wrote:
>
>> (meaning no distribution has ever used it before to my knowledge),
>
>
> FYI, SuSE has been using /srv for ftp, httpd and other server data 
> increasingly, at least, for its last two or three distributions.
>
> There was lengthy discussion on the FHS mailing lists when (and 
> before) /srv was added to the standard and opinions were sought from 
> major distributions.  For example, see 
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-lsb/2003/11/msg00009.html and 
> http://bugs.freestandards.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16 for 
> some of that discussion.
>
> /srv was a step towards specifying a location for server data without 
> dictating how that data should be further partitioned, and while 
> acknowledging that it would be unreasonable to mandate moving 
> /var/spool/mail into /srv as part of the standard.
>
> I'd suggest that sticking close to the FHS standard, including /srv, 
> and referencing the FHS standard, educates a LFS reader as to the 
> expected locations of files in distributions that stick to the standard.
>
> Perhaps _the_ major educational advantage I see in LFS is the 
> piecewise building of the system, which gives one an opportunity to 
> ask in detail why this or that has been added to the system each step 
> along the way (including an empty /srv directory).  I could educate 
> myself equally with many other distributions but the initial hurdle in 
> breaking down, say, the minimal gentoo installation and its build 
> scripts, is greater than the effort needed to examine the building of 
> an LFS system (even if I don't actually build the system). 


Nice post Mark.  I agree with your comments and appreciate the 
documentation.
  -- Bruce






More information about the lfs-dev mailing list