6 ms·

Congratulations to everyone involved. I've been running wheezy on my home server for a while now (/var/www moved to /srv, apt diffs package lists...) and i look

by mappu 14y ago

Congratulations to everyone involved. I've been running wheezy on my home server for a while now (/var/www moved to /srv, apt diffs package lists...) and i look forward to upgrading the production servers over the coming months. As an aside, it's really interesting that the word 'Linux' is mentioned only once on this page - and only after the kFreeBSD kernel.

leeoniya 14y ago
i've always wondered about /var/www vs /srv/www nginx on ubuntu now uses /usr/share/nginx/www i wonder how long these conventions will continue to be all over the place.
- oinksoft 14y ago
  That's why we have the FHS ;) /srv contains site-specific data which is served by this system. http://www.samba.org/~cyeoh/pub/fhs-2.3.html#SRVDATAFORSERVICESPROVIDEDBYSYSTEM http://www.samba.org/~cyeoh/pub/fhs-2.3.html#SRVDATAFORSERVI... Unfortunately, /srv/ is often ignored. Good move by Debian to make this change, and hopefully this gets the ball rolling for other distros.
  - pconf 14y ago
    /srv will continue to be ignored just as /opt and other one-offs are ignored. Reason being that they duplicate existing functionality, in this case under /var, /usr, or /usr/local. What /srv/ really stands for is NIH.
    - moe 14y ago
      /opt is justified. /srv is indeed NIH (redundant with /var/whatever).
      - jmomo 14y ago
        /opt is basically for 3rd parties to install software, because they can't be trusted to behave and integrate with the regular filesystem. The last thing you want is Oracle farking around with anything under /usr or /var, because they will fuck up your entire OS for their benefit alone. That is why /opt exists, in my understanding. /srv is a bit questionable to me. Basically it's another /var. I always used directories like /var/local and /var/share (sambd and nfs shares). However, I am understanding the FHS crew wants to freeze the /var filesystem because it was getting too crazy with all kinds of stuff being placed under /var, and the likelihood of conflicts was getting high.
        ra 14y ago
        Yeah, they could have gone down the /var/srv direction, which would have been OK. But I think /srv actually makes more sense as /var is often on separate disks because /var/lib/ gets very IO heavy.
        gaius 14y ago
        In the days of SAN, all assumptions about separate filesystems should be revisited. They might be, in fact probably are, on the same spindles.
        FooBarWidget 14y ago
        Because Oracle cannot install to /usr/local/oracle? I don't see the value of /opt.
        claudius 14y ago
        /usr/local is meant to replicate /usr in the way that binaries go into /usr/local/bin, libraries into /usr/local/lib etc., but for software that isn’t managed by the package manager – at least that’s what it is used for nowadays. So a well-behaving software would happily go into /usr/local, whereas the ugly software things that want their own folder somewhere better go into /opt.
        14y ago
      - nuclear_eclipse 14y ago
        Keeping all user/site data under /srv makes it superbly easy to back up everything on a server from a single base directory.
        deleted 14y ago
        [deleted]
      - scott_karana 14y ago
        Your wildcard "whatever" says it all.
- chc 14y ago
  /usr/share/nginx is the default root path for nginx. It sounds like Ubuntu has just stopped trying.
  - pconf 14y ago
    The docroot path? That would indicate the Ubuntu devs who chose this location had little or no sysadmin experience. Files and dirs under /usr should not be mutable, that's what /var is for. At least they didn't locate it on the root directory. Mount points should never be on root. See the sources for stat() for the main reason why not.
    - beatgammit 14y ago
      I don't understand. I have /boot, /home and sometimes /srv in a different partition. I don't know of any other way to accomplish that without using putting mount points on root, unless you mean additional, non-FHS mount points...
      - pconf 14y ago
        >I have /boot, /home and sometimes /srv in a different >partition. I don't know of any other way to accomplish >that /boot is typically located on the same disk as root, so that should be ok. /srv and /home, however, would be problematic root mounts. You can use automount to fix /home but /srv should be mounted under /usr or /var. Mounting NFS or busy disks on the root dir is not a good idea on any server where filesystem i/o performance is an issue.

by mappu 14y ago

leeoniya 14y ago

i've always wondered about /var/www vs /srv/www nginx on ubuntu now uses /usr/share/nginx/www i wonder how long these conventions will continue to be all over the place.

oinksoft 14y ago
That's why we have the FHS ;) /srv contains site-specific data which is served by this system. http://www.samba.org/~cyeoh/pub/fhs-2.3.html#SRVDATAFORSERVICESPROVIDEDBYSYSTEM http://www.samba.org/~cyeoh/pub/fhs-2.3.html#SRVDATAFORSERVI... Unfortunately, /srv/ is often ignored. Good move by Debian to make this change, and hopefully this gets the ball rolling for other distros.
- pconf 14y ago
  /srv will continue to be ignored just as /opt and other one-offs are ignored. Reason being that they duplicate existing functionality, in this case under /var, /usr, or /usr/local. What /srv/ really stands for is NIH.
  - moe 14y ago
    /opt is justified. /srv is indeed NIH (redundant with /var/whatever).
    - jmomo 14y ago
      /opt is basically for 3rd parties to install software, because they can't be trusted to behave and integrate with the regular filesystem. The last thing you want is Oracle farking around with anything under /usr or /var, because they will fuck up your entire OS for their benefit alone. That is why /opt exists, in my understanding. /srv is a bit questionable to me. Basically it's another /var. I always used directories like /var/local and /var/share (sambd and nfs shares). However, I am understanding the FHS crew wants to freeze the /var filesystem because it was getting too crazy with all kinds of stuff being placed under /var, and the likelihood of conflicts was getting high.
      - ra 14y ago
        Yeah, they could have gone down the /var/srv direction, which would have been OK. But I think /srv actually makes more sense as /var is often on separate disks because /var/lib/ gets very IO heavy.
        gaius 14y ago
        In the days of SAN, all assumptions about separate filesystems should be revisited. They might be, in fact probably are, on the same spindles.
      - FooBarWidget 14y ago
        Because Oracle cannot install to /usr/local/oracle? I don't see the value of /opt.
        claudius 14y ago
        /usr/local is meant to replicate /usr in the way that binaries go into /usr/local/bin, libraries into /usr/local/lib etc., but for software that isn’t managed by the package manager – at least that’s what it is used for nowadays. So a well-behaving software would happily go into /usr/local, whereas the ugly software things that want their own folder somewhere better go into /opt.
        14y ago
    - nuclear_eclipse 14y ago
      Keeping all user/site data under /srv makes it superbly easy to back up everything on a server from a single base directory.
      - deleted 14y ago
        [deleted]
    - scott_karana 14y ago
      Your wildcard "whatever" says it all.
chc 14y ago
/usr/share/nginx is the default root path for nginx. It sounds like Ubuntu has just stopped trying.
- pconf 14y ago
  The docroot path? That would indicate the Ubuntu devs who chose this location had little or no sysadmin experience. Files and dirs under /usr should not be mutable, that's what /var is for. At least they didn't locate it on the root directory. Mount points should never be on root. See the sources for stat() for the main reason why not.
  - beatgammit 14y ago
    I don't understand. I have /boot, /home and sometimes /srv in a different partition. I don't know of any other way to accomplish that without using putting mount points on root, unless you mean additional, non-FHS mount points...
    - pconf 14y ago
      >I have /boot, /home and sometimes /srv in a different >partition. I don't know of any other way to accomplish >that /boot is typically located on the same disk as root, so that should be ok. /srv and /home, however, would be problematic root mounts. You can use automount to fix /home but /srv should be mounted under /usr or /var. Mounting NFS or busy disks on the root dir is not a good idea on any server where filesystem i/o performance is an issue.