The Filesystem Hierarchy Standard version 2.3, released on January 29, 2004 calls for "data for services provided by this system" to be stored under /svr. Tomcat (as well as many other packages) as of version 6.0.13-r3 does not adhere to this standard. Proposed solution possibilities: * Update this and other appropriate packages to adhere to the new standard * Add a USE flag to cause affected packages to adhere to the new standard * Update webapp-config exclusively to manage this standard. Justifications: 1. Gentoo dissects the Tomcat install in many ways already to adhere to this standard and a partial implementation is a messy thing. This leaves adherence to both the original Tomcat layout and FHS broken. 2. It is very often desirable to isolate files served from a system (via ftp, httpd, tomcat, etc.) in their own file system. Currently, tomcat-served files install to /var/lib/tomcat-6 and apache-served files to /var/www. This alone makes it difficult with the current layout. References and Related Information [Gentoo] Tomcat Guide - http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/java/tomcat-guide.xml Setting up a new server - http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-326025.html Filesystem Hierarchy Standard Website - http://www.pathname.com/fhs
1/ Noone ever said that Gentoo adheres to FHS. 2/ /srv support has been removed from all (two :P) ebuilds that supported it, the maintainance was an enormous PITA. Don't expect it to come back to Apache or MySQL. As for webapps, you can install them whereever you want, it's configurable. 3/ Filing bugs won't change a thing here, you need to get people willing to support and maintain such setups. GLEP20 [1] is dead and such suggestions belong to gentoo-dev mailing list, not to bugzilla. [1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0020.html
Sorry for length (In reply to comment #0) > Justifications: > 1. Gentoo dissects the Tomcat install in many ways already to adhere to this > standard and a partial implementation is a messy thing. As stated in the Gentoo Tomcat Guides, we strive to comply. We do not claim to be fully compliant at this time. But I do not disagree that partial implementations are not ideal. > 2. It is very often desirable to isolate files served from a system (via ftp, > httpd, tomcat, etc.) in their own file system. Another developer, nelchael and myself are supposed to be working on a solution for this. We are going to come up with a place to put docbase and webapps, container independent. I can't say if we will use /srv or not. We might based on FHS. > Proposed solution possibilities: > * Update this and other appropriate packages to adhere to the new standard Easier said than done. Maybe some packages will adapt it, and maybe not. Surely not something to force on all. > * Add a USE flag to cause affected packages to adhere to the new standard That's pretty pointless. If we go that route it's all or nothing. I can't see any benefit of having a USE flag other than confusion. > * Update webapp-config exclusively to manage this standard. We might use webapp-config for Java webapps as well. That is part of what we need to work on. Once we decided on a location. So Java webapps can be packaged, installed, and managed per vhost. But it's all a decent amount of work. Volunteers are always welcome :) (In reply to comment #1) > 1/ Noone ever said that Gentoo adheres to FHS. Chill, and yes it's documented http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?part=2&chap=1#doc_chap3 Granted it's not stated 100% compliance with all packages :) The Tomcat Guides do mention the reason Tomcat is dissected on Gentoo vs most all other Tomcat installs is due to FHS. > 2/ /srv support has been removed from all (two :P) ebuilds that supported it, > the maintainance was an enormous PITA. Don't expect it to come back to Apache > or MySQL. As for webapps, you can install them whereever you want, it's > configurable. That is good justification for Java apps to not go in /srv. Then again they might, it's hard to say. I would like input from others there on that. But again if it's configurable, then a user could choose /srv, and problem solved :) > 3/ Filing bugs won't change a thing here, Well it can't hurt either. Granted it would be nice if discussion could take place on the Gentoo Java or Developer mailing list. Ideally the Java one, since this has been an overlying topic for the past couple of months. Check Java ml achives for a few posts on it. > you need to get people willing to support and maintain such setups. Agreed, and in time we will make something. > GLEP20 [1] is dead and such suggestions belong to gentoo-dev > mailing list, not to bugzilla. I will look more into the glep, I was more familiar with 11. Granted discussion might not be ideal here. It's not horrible either, and I don't think it should be discouraged anywhere. It's not like a bug can't be referenced. Nor forgotten about as easily as a deleted email.
For the time being I am going to close this as wontfix. While we do try to adhere to FHS as part of Gentoo policies. It seems we are deviating from FHS across the board wrt to /srv directory. While I am not entirely opposed to creating and using a /srv directory. As previously mentioned on this bug and in my conversations with others. Seems more don't want it than do. We will be looking into integrating with webapp-config and using possibly /var/www for deployment of webapps for single or vhost usage. But that likely is best discussed on another feature request bug or etc. So for the time being, going to close this one. If Gentoo globally revisits the concept of a /srv directory. Then I as the Tomcat maintainer have no problem adapting the package. Just don't fell like spear heading the initiative behind a /srv directory globally. I have other battles there I care about more :) Thanks for the info, and sorry we are unable to comply at this time fully with FHS.
