[gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Gustavo Adolfo Silva Ribeiro Felisberto]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 471 bytes --]

Right now ftpd builds create /home/ftp directory as this will be the
home of the anonymous account home. One user opened a bug and he says
that the proper place would be /var/ftp to go with /var/www . What do
you guys think?

-- 
Gustavo Felisberto
(HumpBack)
Web: http://dev.gentoo.org/~humpback
Blog: http://blog.felisberto.net/
------------
It's most certainly GNU/Linux, not Linux. Read more at
http://www.gnu.org/gnu/why-gnu-linux.html .
-------------

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Mike Frysinger]

On Sunday 20 March 2005 06:49 pm, Gustavo Adolfo Silva Ribeiro Felisberto 
wrote:
> Right now ftpd builds create /home/ftp directory as this will be the
> home of the anonymous account home. One user opened a bug and he says
> that the proper place would be /var/ftp to go with /var/www . What do
> you guys think?

this would probably have to go through base-system since the ftp user is 
contained within the passwd file from baselayout ...

that said, i'd be against /var/ftp versus /home/ftp as the default
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Ciaran McCreesh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 679 bytes --]

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 23:49:05 +0000 Gustavo Adolfo Silva Ribeiro
Felisberto <humpback@gentoo.org> wrote:
| Right now ftpd builds create /home/ftp directory as this will be the
| home of the anonymous account home. One user opened a bug and he says
| that the proper place would be /var/ftp to go with /var/www . What do
| you guys think?

System dependent. If ftp directories are machine-local, /var. If they're
shared across many machines, /home. If your sysadmin is a two dollar
redhat crack monkey, /srv.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Fluxbox, shell tools)
Mail            : ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web             : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Malte S. Stretz]

On Monday 21 March 2005 01:02 CET Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 23:49:05 +0000 Gustavo Adolfo Silva Ribeiro
>
> Felisberto <humpback@gentoo.org> wrote:
> | Right now ftpd builds create /home/ftp directory as this will be the
> | home of the anonymous account home. One user opened a bug and he says
> | that the proper place would be /var/ftp to go with /var/www . What do
> | you guys think?
>
> System dependent. If ftp directories are machine-local, /var. If they're
> shared across many machines, /home. If your sysadmin is a two dollar
> redhat crack monkey, /srv.

You mean a two dollar redhat crack monkey who read the FHS 2.3? ;~)

Having a /srv around might feel funny in the first place, but it indeed 
makes sense if you got used to it.  Pretty nice to find the important 
things to backup for example (when I'm low on backup space I don't want to 
save the users' pr0n).

I think the discussion whether Gentoo wants to adopt /srv or not died away 
without a conclusion about half a year ago.

Cheers,
Malte
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Donnie Berkholz]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Mike Frysinger wrote:
> that said, i'd be against /var/ftp versus /home/ftp as the default

Why?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCPhiQXVaO67S1rtsRAplNAKC7St6r5P3QBuU+HP/U+9X+oM4L5wCg7SFy
dghcSMU+B7svNdiqdo6+5Vg=
=Wg3B
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Mike Frysinger]

On Sunday 20 March 2005 07:30 pm, Malte S. Stretz wrote:
> On Monday 21 March 2005 01:02 CET Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 23:49:05 +0000 Gustavo Adolfo Silva Ribeiro
> >
> > Felisberto <humpback@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > | Right now ftpd builds create /home/ftp directory as this will be the
> > | home of the anonymous account home. One user opened a bug and he says
> > | that the proper place would be /var/ftp to go with /var/www . What do
> > | you guys think?
> >
> > System dependent. If ftp directories are machine-local, /var. If they're
> > shared across many machines, /home. If your sysadmin is a two dollar
> > redhat crack monkey, /srv.
>
> You mean a two dollar redhat crack monkey who read the FHS 2.3? ;~)

FHS doesnt really say anything other than 'the services should use /src' ... 
they have no decision about subdirs with it
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Carlos Silva]

On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 01:30 +0100, Malte S. Stretz wrote:
> On Monday 21 March 2005 01:02 CET Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 23:49:05 +0000 Gustavo Adolfo Silva Ribeiro
> >
> > Felisberto <humpback@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > | Right now ftpd builds create /home/ftp directory as this will be the
> > | home of the anonymous account home. One user opened a bug and he says
> > | that the proper place would be /var/ftp to go with /var/www . What do
> > | you guys think?
> >
> > System dependent. If ftp directories are machine-local, /var. If they're
> > shared across many machines, /home. If your sysadmin is a two dollar
> > redhat crack monkey, /srv.
> 
> You mean a two dollar redhat crack monkey who read the FHS 2.3? ;~)
> 
> Having a /srv around might feel funny in the first place, but it indeed 
> makes sense if you got used to it.  Pretty nice to find the important 
> things to backup for example (when I'm low on backup space I don't want to 
> save the users' pr0n).
> 
> I think the discussion whether Gentoo wants to adopt /srv or not died away 
> without a conclusion about half a year ago.

Well, it's a fact that the two big distros for servers (RHAS3 and SLES9)
use /srv. They both had to get that ideia from somewhere...

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Mike Frysinger]

On Sunday 20 March 2005 07:42 pm, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > that said, i'd be against /var/ftp versus /home/ftp as the default
>
> Why?

because no one talks about /var/ftp in any specification and i dont want to 
transition to something just to have everyone decide on another default which 
will require another change

i think /srv is a stupid idea, but if other distros / standards are humping 
that as the new location, then i would move us to /srv instead of /var
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Stuart Longland]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2211 bytes --]

Carlos Silva wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 01:30 +0100, Malte S. Stretz wrote:
>
>>On Monday 21 March 2005 01:02 CET Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 23:49:05 +0000 Gustavo Adolfo Silva Ribeiro
>>>
>>>Felisberto <humpback@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>>| Right now ftpd builds create /home/ftp directory as this will be the
>>>| home of the anonymous account home. One user opened a bug and he says
>>>| that the proper place would be /var/ftp to go with /var/www . What do
>>>| you guys think?
>>>
>>>System dependent. If ftp directories are machine-local, /var. If they're
>>>shared across many machines, /home. If your sysadmin is a two dollar
>>>redhat crack monkey, /srv.

*rofl* I wouln't go saying that to people's faces though -- the "crack
monkey" in question may not appreciate that ;-)

>>You mean a two dollar redhat crack monkey who read the FHS 2.3? ;~)
>>
>>Having a /srv around might feel funny in the first place, but it indeed
>>makes sense if you got used to it.  Pretty nice to find the important
>>things to backup for example (when I'm low on backup space I don't want to
>>save the users' pr0n).
>>
>>I think the discussion whether Gentoo wants to adopt /srv or not died away
>>without a conclusion about half a year ago.
>
> Well, it's a fact that the two big distros for servers (RHAS3 and SLES9)
> use /srv. They both had to get that ideia from somewhere...
>

Eachother perhaps?

In a way, it makes sense to agree on a standard... I thought this was
/home/ftp and /var/www.  Mind you... Apache consider
/usr/local/apache/htdocs as the standard web directory -- so who knows. ;-)

Personally, I prefer my web stuff in /home/httpd, as I usually have more
space there, but once again... users really need to decide where to put
things for themselves, and just symlink /var/www to that place.
--
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| Stuart Longland -oOo- http://stuartl.longlandclan.hopto.org |
| Atomic Linux Project     -oOo-    http://atomicl.berlios.de |
| - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - |
| I haven't lost my mind - it's backed up on a tape somewhere |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 256 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Carlos Silva]

On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 11:52 +1000, Stuart Longland wrote:
> In a way, it makes sense to agree on a standard... I thought this was
> /home/ftp and /var/www.  Mind you... Apache consider
> /usr/local/apache/htdocs as the standard web directory -- so who knows. ;-)
> 
> Personally, I prefer my web stuff in /home/httpd, as I usually have more
> space there, but once again... users really need to decide where to put
> things for themselves, and just symlink /var/www to that place.

If we are going to follow the FHS standards we have to change/discuss
two things:
/media vs /mnt
http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#MEDIAMOUNTPOINT vs
http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html

and (/home/ftp && /var/www) vs /srv
http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Martin Schlemmer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 905 bytes --]

On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 11:53 +0000, Carlos Silva wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 11:52 +1000, Stuart Longland wrote:
> > In a way, it makes sense to agree on a standard... I thought this was
> > /home/ftp and /var/www.  Mind you... Apache consider
> > /usr/local/apache/htdocs as the standard web directory -- so who knows. ;-)
> > 
> > Personally, I prefer my web stuff in /home/httpd, as I usually have more
> > space there, but once again... users really need to decide where to put
> > things for themselves, and just symlink /var/www to that place.
> 
> If we are going to follow the FHS standards

We do not follow FHS as such, but rather we agree to do things according
to the FHS where they are sane, and suite our purpose (think /usr/kde
which is really not FHS complaint).


-- 
Martin Schlemmer
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer
Cape Town, South Africa


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Drake Wyrm]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1416 bytes --]

At 2005-03-21T14:16:12+0200, Martin Schlemmer <azarah@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 11:53 +0000, Carlos Silva wrote:
> > If we are going to follow the FHS standards
> 
> We do not follow FHS as such, but rather we agree to do things
> according to the FHS where they are sane, and suite our purpose (think
> /usr/kde which is really not FHS complaint).

Or /usr/portage, which is also not really FHS compliant.

Wonderful thing about standards in the technical community. There's no
way to force them on an unwilling populace, so the stupid ones just die
(e.g. /srv, /media). Good ideas like clearing all the effluvia out of
/usr/* and /var/* sometimes survive.

Bravo, btw, to those who wrestled /usr/X11R6 into a compatibility
symlink, even though the FHS makes an exception and allows it.

Personally, I'd like to see some consistency in the "home directory" of
services. I can accept the point of those who disagree with creating
/srv in order to accomplish that, though. There are plenty of other
places to which services can be shuffled. /var/{cache,lib,spool} and
/home work great. Generally, I don't have a problem with whatever the
devs decide, as long as I can correct it to my own tastes in the
configuration.

-- 
Batou: Hey, Major... You ever hear of "human rights"?
Kusanagi: I understand the concept, but I've never seen it in action.
  --Ghost in the Shell

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Drake Wyrm]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1416 bytes --]

At 2005-03-21T14:16:12+0200, Martin Schlemmer <azarah@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 11:53 +0000, Carlos Silva wrote:
> > If we are going to follow the FHS standards
> 
> We do not follow FHS as such, but rather we agree to do things
> according to the FHS where they are sane, and suite our purpose (think
> /usr/kde which is really not FHS complaint).

Or /usr/portage, which is also not really FHS compliant.

Wonderful thing about standards in the technical community. There's no
way to force them on an unwilling populace, so the stupid ones just die
(e.g. /srv, /media). Good ideas like clearing all the effluvia out of
/usr/* and /var/* sometimes survive.

Bravo, btw, to those who wrestled /usr/X11R6 into a compatibility
symlink, even though the FHS makes an exception and allows it.

Personally, I'd like to see some consistency in the "home directory" of
services. I can accept the point of those who disagree with creating
/srv in order to accomplish that, though. There are plenty of other
places to which services can be shuffled. /var/{cache,lib,spool} and
/home work great. Generally, I don't have a problem with whatever the
devs decide, as long as I can correct it to my own tastes in the
configuration.

-- 
Batou: Hey, Major... You ever hear of "human rights"?
Kusanagi: I understand the concept, but I've never seen it in action.
  --Ghost in the Shell

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Carlos Silva]

On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 13:58 -0800, Drake Wyrm wrote:
> At 2005-03-21T14:16:12+0200, Martin Schlemmer <azarah@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 11:53 +0000, Carlos Silva wrote:
> > > If we are going to follow the FHS standards
> > 
> > We do not follow FHS as such, but rather we agree to do things
> > according to the FHS where they are sane, and suite our purpose (think
> > /usr/kde which is really not FHS complaint).
> 
> Or /usr/portage, which is also not really FHS compliant.
> 
> Wonderful thing about standards in the technical community. There's no
> way to force them on an unwilling populace, so the stupid ones just die
> (e.g. /srv, /media). Good ideas like clearing all the effluvia out of
> /usr/* and /var/* sometimes survive.

I was just reading... We have a GLEP about this, GLEP 20 (/srv -
Services Home Directory Support)

It was accepted, maybe we should try to start to move things to /srv...
(even if it is a stupid place to put things :X )

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Juergen Hoetzel]

On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 12:47:00AM +0000, Carlos Silva wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 01:30 +0100, Malte S. Stretz wrote:
> > On Monday 21 March 2005 01:02 CET Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 23:49:05 +0000 Gustavo Adolfo Silva Ribeiro
> > >
> > > Felisberto <humpback@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > > | Right now ftpd builds create /home/ftp directory as this will be the
> > > | home of the anonymous account home. One user opened a bug and he says
> > > | that the proper place would be /var/ftp to go with /var/www . What do
> > > | you guys think?
> > >
> > > System dependent. If ftp directories are machine-local, /var. If they're
> > > shared across many machines, /home. If your sysadmin is a two dollar
> > > redhat crack monkey, /srv.
> > 
> > You mean a two dollar redhat crack monkey who read the FHS 2.3? ;~)
> > 
> > Having a /srv around might feel funny in the first place, but it indeed 
> > makes sense if you got used to it.  Pretty nice to find the important 
> > things to backup for example (when I'm low on backup space I don't want to 
> > save the users' pr0n).
> > 
> > I think the discussion whether Gentoo wants to adopt /srv or not died away 
> > without a conclusion about half a year ago.
> 
> Well, it's a fact that the two big distros for servers (RHAS3 and SLES9)
> use /srv. They both had to get that ideia from somewhere...
We have to blame SuSE for this. I run RedHats (so-called) Enterprise
Servers @work:

[root@mail root]# cat /etc/redhat-release 
Red Hat Enterprise Linux ES release 3 (Taroon)
[root@mail root]# getent passwd ftp
ftp:x:14:50:FTP User:/var/ftp:/sbin/nologin


Jürgen

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Mike Frysinger]

On Monday 21 March 2005 05:19 pm, Carlos Silva wrote:
> I was just reading... We have a GLEP about this, GLEP 20 (/srv -
> Services Home Directory Support)

hmm, just read the GLEP ... looks like a whole lot of crap ...
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Sven Vermeulen]

Mike Frysinger wrote:
> hmm, just read the GLEP ... looks like a whole lot of crap ...

"""
/srv will be supported via a USE flag. This gives users the choice of 
using a dedicated service home hierarchy or not.
"""

In other words, I wouldn't know why anyone would be against this, unless 
the implementation would be cumbersome. But if developers are happy to 
work on this, why not.

-- 
  ^__^   And Larry saw that it was Good.
  (oo)                                      Sven Vermeulen
  (__)   http://www.gentoo.org              Documentation & PR
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Carlos Silva]

On Tue, 2005-03-22 at 08:43 +0100, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > hmm, just read the GLEP ... looks like a whole lot of crap ...
> 
> """
> /srv will be supported via a USE flag. This gives users the choice of 
> using a dedicated service home hierarchy or not.
> """
> 
> In other words, I wouldn't know why anyone would be against this, unless 
> the implementation would be cumbersome. But if developers are happy to 
> work on this, why not.
> 
I don't see any problem, since the user _actually_ have the choice...

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Paul Waring]

On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 08:43:03 +0100, Sven Vermeulen <swift@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> """
> /srv will be supported via a USE flag. This gives users the choice of
> using a dedicated service home hierarchy or not.
> """
> 
> In other words, I wouldn't know why anyone would be against this, unless
> the implementation would be cumbersome. But if developers are happy to
> work on this, why not.

Provided that the USE flag is switched off by default (so I don't have
to go messing around with make.conf because someone thought putting
stuff in /src was a good idea) I'm not too fussed.

Paul

-- 
Rogue Tory
www.roguetory.org.uk
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Mike Frysinger]

On Tuesday 22 March 2005 02:43 am, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > hmm, just read the GLEP ... looks like a whole lot of crap ...
>
> """
> /srv will be supported via a USE flag. This gives users the choice of
> using a dedicated service home hierarchy or not.
> """

i mean thtere's a whole lot of configuration BS

wtf do packages need to do to 'support' /srv ?  wrt to ftp, all a user has to 
do is change the ftp user's HOME and create the directory in /srv
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Alec Warner]

Paul Waring wrote:

>On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 08:43:03 +0100, Sven Vermeulen <swift@gentoo.org> wrote:
>  
>
>>Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>"""
>>/srv will be supported via a USE flag. This gives users the choice of
>>using a dedicated service home hierarchy or not.
>>"""
>>
>>In other words, I wouldn't know why anyone would be against this, unless
>>the implementation would be cumbersome. But if developers are happy to
>>work on this, why not.
>>    
>>
>
>Provided that the USE flag is switched off by default (so I don't have
>to go messing around with make.conf because someone thought putting
>stuff in /src was a good idea) I'm not too fussed.
>
>Paul
>
>  
>
Whether it's off or on by default should be of no consequence, unless of 
course you aren't paying attention when you install anything? :)  Thats 
why there is emerge -pv, so you see what you are about to do.  Could be 
nice to see a gentoo-announce e-mail once it's in effect though.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Ciaran McCreesh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 532 bytes --]

On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:22:02 -0500 Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
wrote:
| i mean thtere's a whole lot of configuration BS
| 
| wtf do packages need to do to 'support' /srv ?  wrt to ftp, all a user
| has to  do is change the ftp user's HOME and create the directory in
| /srv

Aren't you looking forward to some insanely complicated srvapp-config
tool?

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Fluxbox, shell tools)
Mail            : ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web             : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Mike Frysinger]

On Tuesday 22 March 2005 08:01 pm, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:22:02 -0500 Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
> | i mean thtere's a whole lot of configuration BS
> |
> | wtf do packages need to do to 'support' /srv ?  wrt to ftp, all a user
> | has to  do is change the ftp user's HOME and create the directory in
> | /srv
>
> Aren't you looking forward to some insanely complicated srvapp-config
> tool?

plzkillmenowkthxbye
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Anthony Gorecki]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 805 bytes --]

On Tuesday, March 22, 2005 5:01 pm, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Aren't you looking forward to some insanely complicated srvapp-config
> tool?

One more application to package.mask :)


I was meaning to follow this thread (I filed the bug report), however my 
primary mail server suffered a catastrophic failure recently and didn't come 
back online until yesterday.

Regarding /var/ftp versus /srv (or a subdirectory thereof), which is chosen 
really isn't a concern to me as long as ProFTPD's home directory is moved out 
of /home. As previous posts have mentioned, it also doesn't make sense to 
have multiple "serving" directory roots. Unless /var/www is moving 
to /srv, /var/ftp seems to be the most sensible choice for the FTP daemons.


-- 
Anthony Gorecki
Ectro-Linux Foundation

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Wolfram Schlich]

* Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> [2005-03-23 02:11]:
> On Tuesday 22 March 2005 08:01 pm, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:22:02 -0500 Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
> > wrote:
> > | i mean thtere's a whole lot of configuration BS
> > |
> > | wtf do packages need to do to 'support' /srv ?  wrt to ftp, all a user
> > | has to  do is change the ftp user's HOME and create the directory in
> > | /srv
> >
> > Aren't you looking forward to some insanely complicated srvapp-config
> > tool?
> 
> plzkillmenowkthxbye

*rofl*
-- 
Regards,
Wolfram Schlich <wschlich@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Linux * http://www.gentoo.org/~wschlich/
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] /var/ftp VS /home/ftp

[Mike Frysinger]

On Tuesday 22 March 2005 08:22 pm, Anthony Gorecki wrote:
> Regarding /var/ftp versus /srv (or a subdirectory thereof), which is chosen
> really isn't a concern to me as long as ProFTPD's home directory is moved
> out of /home. As previous posts have mentioned, it also doesn't make sense
> to have multiple "serving" directory roots. Unless /var/www is moving to
> /srv, /var/ftp seems to be the most sensible choice for the FTP daemons.

right, setting default ftp's home to /srv/ftp really isnt a big problem, nor 
do i see a need for anything beyond just changing the default /etc/passwd 
file and maybe a few default config files ...
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list