Thava Alagu wrote: > > I propose to deliver this into new config dir say, > /etc/apache2/2.2/webapp.d
That's a fairly major proposal, I'm not sure I see why a new dir is needed? What are the precise usage semantics of this? I'd say if you deliver an apache-specific glue package (as you seem to be doing based on info below), it can probably just deliver into /etc/apache2/2.2/conf.d There's also /etc/apache2/2.2/samples-conf.d if you need to deliver a template or sample that isn't quite suitable for enabling as-is for some reason. > One should be able to include conf.d/*.conf file into httpd.conf It does, yes. > file without > worrying about enabling all webapplications, if they choose to do so. On the other hand, if you don't want to enable phppgadmin, why install SUNWapch22-phppgadmin in the first place? > I see some other linux distributions take slightly different > approaches. Debian has a fairly useful interface to enable/disable these things, possibly something for the Apache team to consider (offtopic for you but they're on the list ;-) > - I propose to deliver this new config file into SUNWapch22-phppgadmin > package. > This is similar to SUNWapch22r-php5 package which delivers php5 > module for webserver. > I would prefer this to get delivered to SUNWphppgadmin-apch22-config > package, > if the official policy, if any, would allow this -- but I somehow have > a feeling, since it delivers file inside > /etc/apache2/ it has to be SUNWapch*. I'm not sure I understand the question, but do you mean about the package name itself? Both proposals above seem ok (I'm debating which one I like more, not sure..). > I think in most cases, one should not run the webserver as root > unless it is absolutely necessary. Indeed, but it doesn't. The delivered configuration runs as webservd. -- Jyri J. Virkki - jyri.virkki at sun.com - Sun Microsystems
