I had "assummed" that apache2 was so that people could test apache2 without killing their apache"1" installation.
IMHO IBM's packaging of early apache (called IHS for - I think IBM HTTP Server) was 'different' and they kept changing the name of the main directory, e.g. changed the capitalization of the directory. Initially it was something like /usr/HTTPServer/... -- I could never remember the changes. Not wanting to go off topic - this is related to my current working layout for AIX - Starting with AIX 5.0 (the beta version) IBM started using /opt as an additional directory for software packages - and these were "mainly" the RPM Linix Affinity packages (aka RPM support). The formal definition I do not know. However, as an observer I see that /usr and /opt are treated in WPAR (workload partitions) as "compareable" because they are both considered to be common to ALL AIX servers at a particiular TLSP (Technology Level + Service Pack). Hence, they are mounted as read-only file systems in the WPAR. /var is used in several ways. Traditionally for logging, but recently more tools are storing data there as well. Hence my preference for, if possible, a clear split between files meant to be read-only/common to all installations and "installation variables". Note also I am putting the man pages in the standard AIX manual location (/usr/share/man) rather than in /*/apache2/* areas. Installed in that location they are automatically available to the man command, i.e. without any addition to a MANPATH variable. Question: is any further discussion of an AIX layout "worthy/useful" in a separate thread? (my original question has been answered I think as a yes - do an AIX package). If yes, the packaging tool is less important (to me). Initially, I am more interested in feedback aka project decisions about the most manageable organization for multiple instances (with System WPAR being a means to generate additional instances). On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 11:06 PM, Noel Butler <noel.but...@ausics.net>wrote: > ** > On Mon, 2012-01-30 at 12:13 -0600, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > > > I have often ponderd WHY people do things like this, the projects name is > > apache, not apache2 > > No, it isn't. Apache is the name of the foundation, and one word > of the project's title. > > > > You're right of course, so that makes it even worse - who then is apache2 > foundation [image: :)] > > > The project is Apache HTTP Server. Simply put, httpd. If you want > > >
<<face-smile.png>>
