On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 02:29:01PM +1000, Roger Buck said:

Roger Buck wrote:

...

...

requires that we run six virtual hosts and a complicated file structure with lots of duplication. This also means that I have spent a lot of time evauating various options for file structure and configuration.

Chris Cormack wrote:

...

Hmm I think you could get around this quite easily by setting an ENV variable in apache for your virtual hosts with the location of koha.conf in it. Then making Output.pm fetch it from the environment variable. We could set this up quite easily for you if you liked?

Also with the use of Alias and ScriptAlias commands you could remove all duplication, see below for an example.

Hmmm I think I know exactly what you're talking about... and I think I understand how it works... but I still think there is a better option... that works just as well for large installations as for small.

...

Especially with the move to templates, so there will be no more static html files

OK... maybe I have misunderstood the current situation... or maybe the templates will overcome some/all of this stuff:

1. Under current setup, I see no clear distinction between opac and intranet file space - for example, I might be using public opac but public opac is calling templates + some images and includes stored in intranet file space? This "blurring" of the lines between Opac and Intranet will become problematic - especially where security is concerned... but maybe for knowing "what goes where" in general?

Right, and this is why we are moving them apart. Opac stuff lives in an opac area. Intranet stuff lives in another.

2. By the principle of least surprise, I would expect to be able to install and run both opac and intranet web services without requiring virtual hosts for either - A user should be able to integrate both services seamlessly into an existing web server - all on a single port at a single hostname.... as well as allowing for virtual hosts if preferred. I don't think this is currently possible "out of the box". If not, then why not?

I think it can be done with a small amount of effort, the effort will smaller as the distinction between the opac and intranet becomes bigger.

3. The answer to #2 above may be that opac and intranet cgi scripts and web pages require same virtual path in webspace even though they are stored in physically separate locations, for example:

On OPAC virtual host: ScriptAlias /cgi-bin/koha/ /usr/local/www/koha/cgi-bin/opac/ ------------^^^^^^^^^^^^^-----------------------------^^^^^^

On INTRANET virtual host: ScriptAlias /cgi-bin/koha/ /usr/local/www/koha/cgi-bin/koha/ ------------^^^^^^^^^^^^^-----------------------------^^^^^^

This is the only reason I can see that a separate virtual host is required?

Could be lots of reasons for a separate virtual host. In fact you may actual separate hosts. One reason is the sites live on different machines. Or on different ip numbers ... only one of which is externally routable. IE your intranet is actually an intranet.

If true, then why is it better to have multiple virtual hosts - compared with separate physical paths in config file. I don't see any security benefits in using virtual servers for the above case?

Am I on the wrong track here? :)

I think perhaps we are talking past each other :-) I want virtual hosts and separate paths for the files. At least between the opac and the intranet. If you have 5 opacs though, you shouldnt need five copies of the cgi-bin and templates. You will need 5 databases and 5 koha.conf files but only one set of the cgi's. So to try and summarise I want the opac and intranet systems to be standalone. Capable of being installed on separate machines, or on the same machine using separate hosts/ipnumbers/port numbers, or on the same machine using the same host and port. IE I want it all :-) Chris