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 1RPDZr-0001Ij-IK for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 13:24:59 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8E89421C1B4; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 13:24:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from svr-us4.tirtonadi.com (svr-us4.tirtonadi.com [69.65.43.212]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F38921C0E5 for ; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 13:23:49 +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 1RPDYi-000ax0-CF for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 20:23:48 +0700 Received: by bkaq10 with SMTP id q10so5317689bka.40 for ; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 05:23:45 -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 10.204.41.66 with SMTP id n2mr12047962bke.77.1321104225264; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 05:23:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.74.16 with HTTP; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 05:23:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.74.16 with HTTP; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 05:23:45 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20111112131152.GA18475@ksp.sk> References: <4EBE38F3.2000005@binarywings.net> <201111121155.41045.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> <20111112131152.GA18475@ksp.sk> Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 20:23:45 +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=bcaec5540aa40ee6b704b1898cd6 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: 00c5888b-b890-4ddc-9f23-6275d6883c0c X-Archives-Hash: 2ddfee1deaacef30906eb1de6f953dae --bcaec5540aa40ee6b704b1898cd6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Nov 12, 2011 8:16 PM, "YoYo Siska" wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 07:40:08PM +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote: > > 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. > > NFS doesn't like when it looses connection to the server. The only > problems I had ever with NFS were because I forgot to unmout it before a > server restart or when I took a computer (laptop) off to another > network... > Otherwise it works well, esp. when mounted ro on the clients, however > for distfiles it might make sense to allow the clients download and save > tarballs that are not there yet ;), though I never used it with many > computer emerging/downloading same same stuff, so can't say if locking > etc works correctly... > > And with NFS the clients won't duplicate the files in their own > distfiles directories ;) Yes, that would be beneficial. But if NFS is as finicky as that, what's a better way to share directories? Rgds, --bcaec5540aa40ee6b704b1898cd6 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Nov 12, 2011 8:16 PM, "YoYo Siska" <yoyo@gl.ksp.sk> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 07:40:08PM +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote:
> > 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" [d= oc]
> > > =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 ver= y 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
> > > =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"
> > > [static]
> > > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Homepage: =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0http://www.acme.com/= software/thttpd/
> > > =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 &#= 39;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.
>
> NFS doesn't like when it looses connection to the server. The only=
> problems I had ever with NFS were because I forgot to unmout it before= a
> server restart or when I =C2=A0took a computer (laptop) off to another=
> network...
> Otherwise it works well, esp. when mounted ro on the clients, however<= br> > for distfiles it might make sense to allow the clients download and sa= ve
> tarballs that are not there yet ;), though I never used it with many > computer emerging/downloading same same stuff, so can't say if loc= king
> etc works correctly...
>
> And with NFS the clients won't duplicate the files in their own > distfiles directories ;)

Yes, that would be beneficial. But if NFS is as finicky as that, what= 9;s a better way to share directories?

Rgds,

--bcaec5540aa40ee6b704b1898cd6--