>>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 3:41 PM, Ed Heron<Ed at heron-ent.com> wrote: >>> >>>> ... >>>> I've written a quick little article detailing how to create a vhost >>>> directory under CentOS. >>>> ... >> From: "Brian Mathis", Friday, August 21, 2009 1:52 PM >> >> I always figured that the "CentOS way" to handle that was to put them >> into the conf.d folder. Is there an advantage to using this method? >> One thing I can think of is that the conf.d is included in the middle >> of the httpd.conf file, while this would be at the bottom. > On 08/22/2009 12:12 AM, Ed Heron wrote: >> >> That is exactly my reasoning. The config file, as distributed, has the >> virtual host containers at the end of the file. From: "Manuel Wolfshant", Friday, August 21, 2009 3:31 PM > > No, the config file as distributed has - just like the original apache > config - an example at the end of it. I do understand that there is already a config file directory. However, the example virtual host is at the end of the the distributed Apache config file. From that positioning, I conclude that it is recommended to have the virtual host stuff at the end, rather than the middle. The existing include is in the middle, therefore, (I'm concluding that) it is not recommended. conf.d appears to be for module config files. I don't know if the virtual host only inherits configuration directives that are defined before it is. If that is the case, any configuration items after the conf.d include would not apply to the virtual hosts (though this is easy to test). Even if that is not the case, it still seems that putting virtual host files in conf.d is improper. Putting virtual host files in conf.d may work but appears to be a shortcut. While nobody would suggest you can't take a shortcut, if it works for you, there should be an official method. To me, moving virtual hosts out of the main config file requires a separate directory. It may be my 'heritage' but separate directories is how it is done in Gentoo.