Don't mention that HTTP is supposedly more efficient than FTP.
If we don't have numbers, it's better not to spread rumours. Expand a bit on the section of HTTP server choises, mentioning Apache, thttpd and boa as alternatives. PR: docs/37037 Submitted by: Dominic Marks <dominic_marks@btinternet.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
0ec0f04efe
commit
d690846d6f
Notes:
svn2git
2020-12-08 03:00:23 +00:00
svn path=/head/; revision=12802
1 changed files with 29 additions and 7 deletions
|
@ -204,14 +204,36 @@
|
||||||
<title>HTTP (required for webpages, optional for FTP fileset)</title>
|
<title>HTTP (required for webpages, optional for FTP fileset)</title>
|
||||||
<para>
|
<para>
|
||||||
If you want to offer the FreeBSD webpages, you need
|
If you want to offer the FreeBSD webpages, you need
|
||||||
to install a webserver a.k.a <application>httpd</application>. You may offer
|
to install a webserver. You may optionally offer the FTP fileset via HTTP.
|
||||||
the FTP fileset via HTTP, as well, if you like.
|
The choice of Webserver software is left up to the mirror administrator.
|
||||||
Some argue HTTP is more efficient for download, but
|
Some of the most popular choises are:
|
||||||
I cannot tell. The most commonly
|
|
||||||
used httpd is Apache, although there are others around,
|
|
||||||
take a look at <filename>/usr/ports/www</filename>.
|
|
||||||
<itemizedlist>
|
<itemizedlist>
|
||||||
<listitem><para><filename role="package">www/apache13</filename></para></listitem>
|
<listitem>
|
||||||
|
<para><filename role="package">www/apache13</filename>:
|
||||||
|
Apache is the most widely deployed Webserver on the Internet. It
|
||||||
|
is used extensively by the FreeBSD Project. You may also
|
||||||
|
wish to use the next generation of the Apache Webserver,
|
||||||
|
available in the ports collection as <filename
|
||||||
|
role="package">www/apache2</filename>.</para>
|
||||||
|
</listitem>
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
<listitem>
|
||||||
|
<para><filename role="package">www/thttpd</filename>:
|
||||||
|
If you are going to be serving a lot amount of static content
|
||||||
|
you may find that using an application such as tHttpd is more
|
||||||
|
efficent than Apache. It is optimized for excellent performance
|
||||||
|
on FreeBSD.</para>
|
||||||
|
</listitem>
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
<listitem>
|
||||||
|
<para><filename role="package">www/boa</filename>:
|
||||||
|
Boa is another alternative to tHttpd and Apache. It should
|
||||||
|
provide considerably better performance than Apache for purely
|
||||||
|
static content. It does not, at the time of writing, contain the
|
||||||
|
same set of optimizations for FreeBSD that are found in
|
||||||
|
tHttpd.</para>
|
||||||
|
</listitem>
|
||||||
</itemizedlist>
|
</itemizedlist>
|
||||||
</para>
|
</para>
|
||||||
</sect3>
|
</sect3>
|
||||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue