16.03.2012 11:02, Guillaume Rousse kirjoitti: > Le 16/03/2012 03:01, Anssi Hannula a écrit : >>> So I'd rather revert the change, and make lighttpd autonomous also. >>> Unless someone can convince me there is an advantage having lighttpd >>> executing as 'apache' :) >> >> The web applications policy has files being owned by 'apache' user, and >> I don't see how that could work if lighttpd used a different user: >> https://wiki.mageia.org/en/Web_applications_policy > This policy was crafted with apache in mind only, not all available web > servers. And its explicitely refers to apache integration, not generic > webserver compatibility. For instance, the configuration file provided > is apache-specific. Even if we have compatible file permissions, and if > we asked packagers to also provide a default lighttpd configuration file > (slighly more work), that would still be mostly theorical compatibility > without actual testing from the packagers (many more work). > > So, rather than a potential compatibility, without documented limits, > should we rather not make clear than adapting our web applications > package to any other web server than apache is fully up to the end user ?
It is rather easy for the user to create a lighttpd configuration file themselves etc, however it is much more difficult for the user to start changing/guessing the needed file permissions for the larger applications. Also, any changes would be overwritten by any upgrade, which is quite bad IMO. (and yes, I do have seen actual users using lighttpd with our webapp packages) -- Anssi Hannula