/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