[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1101?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15062855#comment-15062855
]
Andy Seaborne commented on JENA-1101:
-------------------------------------
The docs represent how the layout appears to the server. Nothing is mandatory
as to physical location. I don't see any text that specifically applies to the
webapp. What are you referring to?
There can be symbolic link in /etc/fuseki, or /etc/fuseki itself can be a
symbolic link just like running standalone or as a service. Or set environment
variables in the tomcat configuration.
Very little goes in /opt on Ubuntu. I have one directory
{{/opt/sublime_text}}. {{/etc/opt}} is empty. {{/vat/opt}} is empty. There are
parts of FHS that all main stream systems use and parts that not followed so
closely.
What you describe seems to be Centos specific. (I found out that formally,
Ubuntu follows FHS 2.3.)
Packing is distro specific. Making RPMs isn't hard. Make changes to layout so
that existing deployments break on upgrade causes the devs support costs.
> Fuseki filesystem layout and Linux FHS
> --------------------------------------
>
> Key: JENA-1101
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1101
> Project: Apache Jena
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Affects Versions: Fuseki 2.3.1
> Reporter: Joachim Neubert
>
> When it comes to filesystem layout, the Java/Tomcat/Webapps world differs
> quite fundamentally from the Linux world: Whereas for Tomcat or Fuseki it is
> quite normal to have all files under a common root directory, the [Linux
> Filesystem Hierarchy
> Standard|https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filesystem_Hierarchy_Standard] (which
> is followed by most distributions) provides multiple roots for application
> files:
> Configuration goes to /etc, read-only files to /usr, variable files to /var
> (./log, ./cache etc.). To give you a better idea what this means in practice,
> I add the layout of the tomcat installation by Centos 7 RPM as an example.
> From a linux sysadmins point of view, this makes it easy to know where to
> find stuff without any special knowledge of the application, and to
> generalize tasks like backup (e.g. exclude all application cache files on the
> system).
> On the other hand, this means considerable more work, if you have to cover
> systems outside the Linux world too. Things may get even more complicated by
> remaining differeces between distributions and SElinux policies.
> So I don't suppose FHS compatibility is an realistic option for Fuseki.
> Yet, the current handling of mapping $FUSEKI_HOME/run to /etc/fuseki, with
> the whole bunch of assorted runtime files, feels profundly wrong. According
> to FHS, I would expect something like
> {noformat}
> etc/
> fuseki/
> config.ttl
> shiro.ttl
> conf.d/
> service1.ttl
> ...
> {noformat}
> and all the other stuff elsewhere.
> So I wonder if it would be possible to put the config hierarchy above under
> a, say, $FUSEKI_CONF root, which defaults to /etc/fuseki in the .war
> installation, and to $FUSEKI/conf otherwise.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
