[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#8223: question about new webstand (was Bug#8223: info2www symlink broken)



You do not necessarily need a symlink. Most webservers support some form
of aliasing to map http:/doc/xxx to /usr/doc/xxx.

On Sat, 22 Mar 1997, Jim Pick wrote:

> 
> > On Fri, 21 Mar 1997, Scott K. Ellis wrote:
> > 
> > > Package: info2www
> > > Version: 1.2.2.9-4
> > > 
> > > While the webstandard states that http://localhost/doc/ should resolve to
> > > files in the /usr/doc directory, it doesn't provide that there needs to be a
> > > symlink in /var/www.  The info2www symlink should be to /usr/doc/info2www,
> > > not just doc/info2www
> 
> At first, I didn't understand what Scott was try to do.  Then I looked at what
> info2www tried to do, and it didn't work on my system either - so now I 
> understand.
> 
> > The problem is that the policy forbids absolute symlinks. That's why I
> > can't use `/usr/doc/info2www'.
> 
> Correct.  Do the following
> 
> drwxr-xr-x root/root         0 Mar 20 15:46 1997 var/
> drwxr-xr-x root/root         0 Mar 20 15:46 1997 var/www/
> lrwxrwxrwx root/root         0 Mar 20 15:46 1997 var/www/info2www -> 
> ../../usr/doc/info2www
> 
> Instead of
> 
> drwxr-xr-x root/root         0 Mar 20 15:46 1997 var/
> drwxr-xr-x root/root         0 Mar 20 15:46 1997 var/www/
> lrwxrwxrwx root/root         0 Mar 20 15:46 1997 var/www/info2www -> 
> doc/info2www
> 
> The problem is, the webservers (even the ones conforming to the web standard) 
> do not
> have a symlink from /var/www/doc to /usr/doc.
> 
> Remember, there are other ways to accomplish having the http://locahost/doc 
> directory
> pointing to /usr/doc without using symlinks - so the web standard doesn't 
> guarantee
> that a symlink between /var/www/doc and /usr/doc will exist. 
> 
> Personally, I don't really like the idea of having http://localhost/doc 
> pointing
> at /usr/doc.  Most of the stuff there isn't html -- and if you want to look at
> that stuff, dwww will work much better (I'm slightly biased).
>  
> > But why is /var/www not guaranteed to exist? 
> 
> For dwww, I'm creating it, and I'm also putting in a symlink to the location
> of the CGI script (in /usr/lib/dwww/dwww.cgi I think) into 
> /usr/lib/cgi-bin/dwww and another symlink to /var/lib/dwww/html into the
> /var/www (the default document root).
> 
> This is consistant with what Chris is doing with info2www.
>  
> > The Webstandard 3.0 (part of the new policy) says:
> > 
> > -------
> > 3.Web Document Root
> > 
> >       Web Applications should try to avoid storing files in the Web
> > Document Root. Instead use the /usr/doc/<package> directory for documents
> > and register the Web Application via the menu package. If access to the
> > web-root is unavoidable then use
> > 
> >       /var/www
> > 
> >       as the Document Root. This might be just a symlink to the location
> > where the sysadmin has put the real document root.
> > -------
> 
> Since dwww uses dynamically created html, it can't put that stuff under
> /usr/doc, so it must create a symlink to /var/lib/dwww/html (actually
> ../../var/lib/dwww/html for the /var/web directory).  In info2www's
> case, it might make sense to put that stuff under /usr/doc since it
> is all static.  
>  
> > It seams to me as all Debian web _servers_ should create ask the user
> > where he wants to have the web root and make a symlink to /var/www. 
> 
> Huh?  The web root should go wherever the user wants it, but it should
> default to /var/www.  Also, the web server, and other debian web 
> packages should feel free to create /var/www, /usr/lib/cgi-bin and dump
> stuff into them -- since it doesn't create a problem if the user decides
> to have their document root elsewhere.
> 
> > They
> > should also make a symlink /var/www/doc -> ../../usr/doc or tell the web
> > server to map URL's with directory /doc/ to /usr/doc/. 
> 
> The symlink idea isn't a part of the web standard.  The "mapping" part
> is - but if the server does this, then your /var/www/info2www symlink
> won't work.
>  
> > Or do I have to use the new menu system? 
> 
> No, I think that is more for indexing bona-fide documentation, as opposed to 
> creating consistent URL's to data files referenced by CGI scripts.
> 
> I hope this helps.
> 
> dwww will miraculously appear in Incoming in a few hours.  :-)
> 
> Cheers,
> 
>  - Jim
> 
> 
> 
> 

--- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ ---
Please always CC me when replying to posts on mailing lists.

Attachment: pgpEB9XmIu0Ra.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: