From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1RPCtY-00024H-4G for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 12:41:16 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2FD3421C0F8; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 12:41:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from svr-us4.tirtonadi.com (svr-us4.tirtonadi.com [69.65.43.212]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDB9421C024 for ; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 12:40:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bw0-f53.google.com ([209.85.214.53]) by svr-us4.tirtonadi.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RPCsZ-000H3B-Ig for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 19:40:15 +0700 Received: by bkaq10 with SMTP id q10so5282094bka.40 for ; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 04:40:09 -0800 (PST) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.205.130.133 with SMTP id hm5mr7826925bkc.41.1321101609561; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 04:40:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.74.16 with HTTP; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 04:40:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.74.16 with HTTP; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 04:40:08 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <201111121155.41045.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> References: <4EBE38F3.2000005@binarywings.net> <201111121155.41045.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 19:40:08 +0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] The LIGHTEST web server (just for serving files)? From: Pandu Poluan To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0ce047be266f4404b188f05d X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - svr-us4.tirtonadi.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.gentoo.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - poluan.info X-Archives-Salt: fdcc1138-9785-4d24-aea8-d0d5767979ff X-Archives-Hash: da8ade71f1083883c2c848383b86aa3c --000e0ce047be266f4404b188f05d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Nov 12, 2011 7:00 PM, "Mick" wrote: > > I've been using boa just for this purpose for years: > > * www-servers/boa > Available versions: > ~ 0.94.14_rc21 "~x86 ~sparc ~mips ~ppc ~amd64" [doc] > Homepage: http://www.boa.org/ > Description: A very small and very fast http daemon. > > It can be easily locked down for internet facing roles. > > I've also used thttpd (you can throttle its bandwidth if that's important in > your network), but it's probably more than required for this purpose: > > * www-servers/thttpd > Available versions: > 2.25b-r7 "amd64 ~hppa ~mips ppc sparc x86 ~x86-fbsd" [static] > ~ 2.25b-r8 "~amd64 ~hppa ~mips ~ppc ~sparc ~x86 ~x86-fbsd" > [static] > Homepage: http://www.acme.com/software/thttpd/ > Description: Small and fast multiplexing webserver. Thanks for all the input! During my drive home, something hit my brain: why not have the 'master' server share the distfiles dir via NFS? So, the question now becomes: what's the drawback/benefit of NFS-sharing vs HTTP-sharing? The scenario is back-end LAN at the office, thus, a trusted network by definition. Rgds, --000e0ce047be266f4404b188f05d Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Nov 12, 2011 7:00 PM, "Mick" <michaelkintzios@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I've been using boa just for this purpose for years:
>
> * www-servers/boa
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Available versions:
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0~ =C2=A0 =C2=A0= =C2=A0 0.94.14_rc21 "~x86 ~sparc ~mips ~ppc ~amd64" [doc]
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Homepage: =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0http://www.boa.org/
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Description: =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 A very small an= d very fast http daemon.
>
> It can be easily locked down for internet facing roles.
>
> I've also used thttpd (you can throttle its bandwidth if that'= s important in
> your network), but it's probably more than required for this purpo= se:
>
> * www-servers/thttpd
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Available versions:
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A02.25b-r7 "amd64 ~hppa ~mips ppc sparc x86 ~x86-fbsd"= [static]
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0~ =C2=A0 =C2=A0= =C2=A0 2.25b-r8 "~amd64 ~hppa ~mips ~ppc ~sparc ~x86 ~x86-fbsd"<= br> > [static]
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Homepage: =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0http://www.acme.com/software/th= ttpd/
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Description: =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Small and fast = multiplexing webserver.

Thanks for all the input!

During my drive home, something hit my brain: why not have the 'mast= er' server share the distfiles dir via NFS?

So, the question now becomes: what's the drawback/benefit of NFS-sha= ring vs HTTP-sharing? The scenario is back-end LAN at the office, thus, a t= rusted network by definition.

Rgds,

--000e0ce047be266f4404b188f05d--