| 1 |
Luca Barbato wrote: |
| 2 |
> I'm thinking about adding the srvdir[1] global useflag. |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Scream if I miss some discussion preventing it. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> (fenice[2] will use it, that's why I'm adding it) |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> lu |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> [1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0020.html#implementation |
| 11 |
> [2] http://packages.gentoo.org/search/?sstring=fenice |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Hi all, |
| 15 |
not a dev, but please bear with me :-) |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
>From [1] above: |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
GLEP: 20 |
| 21 |
Title: /srv - Services Home Directory Support |
| 22 |
Version: 1.2 |
| 23 |
Last-Modified: 2004/11/11 21:35:53 |
| 24 |
Author: Stuart Herbert <stuart at gentoo.org>, Rob Holland <tigger at gentoo.org> |
| 25 |
Status: Approved |
| 26 |
Type: Standards Track |
| 27 |
Content-Type: text/x-rst |
| 28 |
Created: 09-Feb-2004 |
| 29 |
Post-History: 21-Feb-2004, 11-Nov-2004 |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
It is 2006, any updates on this GELP? |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Just a quick look turned out a 404 error on the FHS2.3 link. ( http://www.pathname.com/fhs/ ?) |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
I am not very read in LSB, but just saw there is a 3.x version... |
| 36 |
What about LSB 3.x? Is it the same recomendation? |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Although I run quite a bunch of services on a few boxes, I don't see this whole idea (/srv). |
| 39 |
I read the GLEP, I read [FHS#srv] but still. And it says: |
| 40 |
"The methodology used to name subdirectories of /srv is unspecified |
| 41 |
as there is currently no consensus on how this should be done." |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
So how does Gentoo implement it? |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
[FHS#svg] http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#SRVDATAFORSERVICESPROVIDEDBYSYSTEM |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
And as the GLEP talks about webapps, what will an upgrade of a webapp (say Bugzilla) to/from srv? |
| 48 |
I feel it breaking and user screaming. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
And a few general comments: |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
Hmm, the GLEP index page [a] shows GLEP 20 with status "SA" which according to the legend is |
| 54 |
"Standards Track + Accepted". The [1] above has status "Approved" which might be the same, but why |
| 55 |
is not there consistency in terms? |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
If it is approved/accepted doesn't it mean it is implemented by somebody? |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
[a] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/ |
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
Kalin. |
| 62 |
|
| 63 |
-- |
| 64 |
|[ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ]| |
| 65 |
+-> http://ThinRope.net/ <-+ |
| 66 |
|[ ______________________ ]| |
| 67 |
-- |
| 68 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives