Desktop issues discussion proposal

Havoc Pennington hp at redhat.com
Fri Apr 23 19:46:43 UTC 2004


On Fri, 2004-04-23 at 15:18, seth vidal wrote:
> 
> do you have any idea how intrusive that is? Especially on laptops where
> hardware gets ODD from release to release.

Intrusive how? (Does ODD mean weird emphasized, or is it an acronym?)
We're talking about an rsync-equivalent to incorporate changes that have
deliberately been queued by the admin.

Of course if you have a totally different config for every user/machine,
you can't benefit from this (and the ability to keep a stateful thick
client system won't go away). The idea is to enable a setup where you
are keeping lots of machines in sync, not to prevent a setup where you
aren't.

> I disagree - there need to be ways for a user to setup and modify config
> files w/o having to understand each one. If I can't tell the chair how
> to reconfigure his network adapter for a static ip when he's in some
> remote location then there is going to be problems.

Ah, but does this require root privs or files in /etc when using a
managed deployment model, that is the question.

> show me any other operating system that doesn't have manual
> administration of configuration settings (system-wide) be able to be
> done from a gui console?
> 
> Can you think of ANY?

I can only think of two other desktop OS's that matter, Windows XP and
OS X. We're trying to improve on those in terms of management, though.
Other suggestions welcome for how to do so.

> I can think of lots that can't do mass-system-maintenance. But NONE that
> can't do a single-system maintenance.
> 
> you're going too far in the opposite direction and it just isn't
> realistic at all.

We can't do everything at once. I'm not looking for ways to say "we
won't do XYZ," but ways to say "we will do XYZ first"

Don't get worried about current functionality vanishing; the question
here is what functionality to add.

Havoc






More information about the Fedora-desktop-list mailing list