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

Best mount point for shared files


use warnings;
use IIUC;
use AFAIK;
use Knowledge::Newbie qw( learn );

my $question=<<'EOF';


  I have a server from which I want to share files via multiple
protocols--so far it's HTTP and SMB.  The files do not reside
on the server, they are mounted from other server via NFS. I was
wondering: where to put the files?  Which is the most "Debian"

  For example, I'm mounting these NFS shares to "serve":


  I'm planning that all of them will available (to Windows stations
connected to "serve") as:


  (All shares will be read-only.  It's an isolated environment
for testing, there's no need to have access policy--anyone can
read, no-one can write.)

A) According to FHS, I should put them in /srv/smb/ for SMB
and /srv/http/ for HTTP.  But that would mean mounting each FS
to two mountpoints.  Sounds confusing to me...is it normal? Are
there any caveats with having one FS in two mountpoints?

B) I have noticed that Apache2 has, by default, DocumentRoot set
to /var/www/.  Does this mean that Apache expects me to have main
storage here?  (I know I can change DocumentRoot, but I'm trying
to learn from default settings... .-D)  Actually I'd expect to
store only index.html and such (there will be some of these).

C) Or I shoud put all to a different location and use symlinks
(I think Apache does not like this)?

D) As C), but use "mount -o bind"? Is this how bind is supposed
to be used?

I'm trying to get an idea of what is "common" or "normal". I welcome
any tips, experiences.



$question .= 'P.S.: Sorry for the typos. I know there are some.';

ask $question;

Alois Mahdal, using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

Reply to: