Le 22/03/2012 21:42, Anssi Hannula a écrit :
20.03.2012 18:48, Guillaume Rousse kirjoitti:
Le 17/03/2012 03:22, Anssi Hannula a écrit :
Hence I suggest a single user id to be used. (I'm fine with any other
solution which works as well)
My main concern is the fuzziness of the current situation where we have
- one virtual package 'webserver' corresponding to four implementations
(apache, lightpd, nginx, cherooke)
- one common base (webserver-base) only used by the two first ones
- all our web applications packages using 'apache' as mandatory dependency
If the main concern is file ownership, I'd propose for the next release
to have each of these servers use a distinct uid, document root and
index page, but use a shared 'webserver' or 'www' gid, and ensure all of
those applications use group-based permission, instead of user-based.
I'd find this setup a bit clearer.
I'd rather they all use the traditional document root "/var/www/html",
but I don't really care much as long as the webapps are usable with both
apache and lighttpd.
I'm not sure if all webapps can easily work with group-based
permissions, but maybe they do (I don't know much about them)...
We will test group-based file permissions in next release.
However, I'm suggesting right now remove 'webserver' virtual package
from nginx and cherooke, and to keep it only for those relying on
'webserver-base' base, aka apache and lighttpd. This would make this
virtual package sounds more like a minimal interface, implemented by a
subset of our web server packages, rather than just a label without
meaning. Is that OK for everyone ?
--
BOFH excuse #349:
Stray Alpha Particles from memory packaging caused Hard Memory Error on
Server.
