-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
> I'm setting up a chrooted apache. All howto's I found _copy_ the > required files into the directory that they later chroot into. > Is it OK (read: safe) to use hardlinks and "mount --bind" instead? [snip] > The files in /usr/chroot/apache/usr could be hardlinked directly. > > This would safe some disk space, add file consistency and allow for use > of read-write and read-only mounted partitions - without dedicating the > partitions solely for apache. The only problem here is that "mount --bind -o ro" does not work as expected (at least not a while back when I tested it) and the consistency argument also fails because when dpkg upgrades a binary the old binary is moved aside and the new binary gets a new inode. Otherwise I don't see any problems (have not used this kind of setup for apache yet). The problem with hardlinks and mount --bind is that your setup isn't getting much easier to manage. - -- arthur - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://tiefighter.et.tudelft.nl/~arthur -- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+16JyVYan35+NCKcRAm06AJ47iZRLAJ7XOiaxuSXyJUCfxA/tdQCgxWjd 7a9STDHBRxVMFiOciJSE3W8= =srDw -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
