Holger Levsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Saturday 22 July 2006 17:35, you wrote:
>> How can that be reconciled with: >> >> The methodology used to name subdirectories of /srv is unspecified as >> there is currently no consensus on how this should be done. One method >> for structuring data under /srv is by protocol, eg. ftp, rsync, www, >> and cvs. On large systems it can be useful to structure /srv by >> administrative context, such as /srv/physics/www, /srv/compsci/cvs, >> etc. This setup will differ from host to host. Therefore, no program >> should rely on a specific subdirectory structure of /srv existing or >> data necessarily being stored in /srv. However /srv should always >> exist on FHS compliant systems and should be used as the default >> location for such data. >> >> I don't see any way that shipping files under /srv in a Debian package >> would be consistent with the second-to-last sentence above. > I do. But I think this is getting out of scope of this bug :) I don't; I think it's exactly the point. > apache might ship with DocumentRoot in /srv/www - but apache must also > work, if you modify this. You might have many DocumentRoots, in > /srv/webserver/foo and in /srv/webserver/foo2... > It says "no program should rely on a specific subdirectory structure of > /srv", not "no program should rely on a specific directory in /srv" - > especially if you define this directory in the programms configuration. Yes, and if you ship files in /srv, then your package is creating and insisting upon a particular structure in /srv. Even if the binaries in the package don't insist, the *package* is insisting. If the local administrator decides they want to organize /srv differently, your files get in the way. If they delete them or move them, every time the package is upgraded, they're re-installed. To me, that seems to break the point that the above paragraph is driving at. Certainly, I can see shipping configuration that points to /srv for local data by default, and even a postinst that creates an initial structure in /srv for the package if this is the first install, but putting the files directly in the package seems to me to be forcing more structure than is allowed here. Maybe we should take this to debian-policy and see what other folks think? I could be wrong and I'm happy to change lintian accordingly if the consensus is that I'm wrong. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
