Jakub wrote: > The idea is that /srv contains system services that are essential for > the proper functioning of the system: locsrv, vfs, inetsrv, ns. These > are supposed to be the 'servers' as in 'multiserver'. On the other hand, > websrv is not that essential and falls into a completely different > category. Typically, the user will not want to run anything from /srv > manually, which might not be the case of websrv. OK, so how about file_bd? Is it essential for the proper operating of the system or not? That's a server that the user will normally start manually (unless we change it to a singleton that is started automatically and add some administration utility for it), so does it belong under /srv?
OTOH do you normally run Apache by hand on your Linux box? Probably not, because it is set up as a service that is started by the init scripts... > To make the distinction clearer, we could introduce something like > /netsrv or /dmn or /usrv. I don't believe in creating a gazillion directories for binaries, especially based on some arbitrary rules. I believe that with time and experience we will see whether there is a need/practical benefit for some sort of classification. Until then this discussion is purely bikeshedding. -Jiri _______________________________________________ HelenOS-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.modry.cz/cgi-bin/listinfo/helenos-devel
