| 1 |
Hi, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On Sat, Mar 09, 2002 at 09:11:35PM -0600, mrfab@×××.net wrote: |
| 4 |
> First, where the hell is vi? It is missing from |
| 5 |
> both the boot image and the base install. I |
| 6 |
> realize that I can emerge it, but having to use |
| 7 |
> an editor as horrible as nano, even just for the |
| 8 |
> initial config, was a bit obnoxious. |
| 9 |
I could not agree more. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> Another file system decision that seems |
| 12 |
> off to me is the choice of /uar/local/httpd for the |
| 13 |
> default documentroot instead of /var/www or |
| 14 |
> something like /home/http. |
| 15 |
I'd prefer /var/www or /var/apache. |
| 16 |
/usr and /usr/local should at least be possible to mount read-only. |
| 17 |
Usually you don't want your apache stuff on a ro partition. |
| 18 |
/home/httpd just seems wrong to me, but I cannot excactly say why. Somehow |
| 19 |
I feel that everyone that owns files on my /home partition should be a |
| 20 |
"real" user (i.e. Humanoid)... ;-) |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> Speaking of apache, it would be better to use |
| 23 |
> something other than nobody:nobody by default. |
| 24 |
Yes; I got used to root:www. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
> I've noticed that a few distros (Redhat in |
| 27 |
> particlular comes to mind) have modified useradd |
| 28 |
> to create a personal group for a given user. |
| 29 |
I don't like modified versions of standard tools. I'd rather have a script |
| 30 |
that does the job for me, and has a different name (i.e. addusrgrp). |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Just my 0.02€. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Greetings |
| 35 |
Gert |
Archives