/tftpboot vs. /var/tftp vs. something else?
Chuck Anderson
cra at WPI.EDU
Tue Nov 13 15:10:59 UTC 2007
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 03:05:43PM +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> It is a bit more complicated since /usr/share/foo and /usr/lib64/foo is
> also for "things belonging to foo". I never made the hypothesis that
> /var/lib is for shared libs, and in fact it is not. But if you read the
> FHS, srv is clearly for tftpboot stuff:
>
> /srv contains site-specific data which is served by this system.
It sounds like FHS needs to be updated with a specification for /srv
that allows vendor stuff and local stuff, e.g. /srv vs. /srv/local.
Or /srv/vendor if you don't want to mess with existing use.
We need to standardize on places to put site-specific data which is
served by this system, for SELinux reasons among others. /srv/ftp,
/srv/tftp, /srv/www, all would make sense.
> while /var/lib is more for local databases (like nis, rpm, locate,
> yum...). Though this may also be the best place for what is in /srv if
> the convention is that the distribution does not touch /srv.
I'd be okay with using /var/lib/tftp since there seems to be precedent
for that, and it breaks FHS the "least".
My argument was mainly against /tftpboot since / might be too small or
read-only.
More information about the devel
mailing list