| 1 |
On Thu, Feb 05, 2004 at 02:17:17AM +0000, Stroller wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On Feb 4, 2004, at 11:44 pm, Stuart Herbert wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> >On Wednesday 04 February 2004 1:37 am, Jon Portnoy wrote: |
| 6 |
> >>What does /srv give us that /var doesn't? |
| 7 |
> >... |
| 8 |
> >I don't think that this is an example of the FHS doing against the way |
| 9 |
> >that |
| 10 |
> >UNIX works - just going against the current habits on many Linux users. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Indeed. As Linux's use of /mnt/subdirectories went against the |
| 13 |
> conventions of Unix sysadmins a decade ago. |
| 14 |
> But at that time lots of workstations didn't have a single |
| 15 |
> removable-media drive - imagine having separate additional /floppy |
| 16 |
> /cd-writer /dvd-rom /zip in root. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> >From what's been said so far, I think we should introduce the /srv |
| 19 |
> >hierarchy. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> One vote from just a user. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Add another vote from a user. I haven't really read the fhs that much, but it seems to me that /var is _machine_ specific data, and /srv would be _daemon_ specific or _service_ specific data. That separation makes sense to me. :-) |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
William |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives