[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: FC2 and general LDAP Support

Yeah, the idea of using a homegeneous user interface is a good one. Please rememeber the linuxconf tool on earlier redhat version. But is really good tool was removed from the distribution. But why?
But i cannot agree with Your objections to the main registry concept. I agree with the argument that the actual registry to complex and its hard to find configuration settings. But I say it again: I doesn't need to be registry copy. We can also learn from those mistakes and make it better. But for me as System Administrator in heterogenous networks with linux servers and windows workstations, i had the less of troubles with the registry in average. Again try to imagine the benefits of big networks. Just a small example:

Think of blade servers for web-application clusters. In a number of 50 to 100 servers. With the ldap system it might be possible to just remotly install a new blade. It this installation starts for the first time, it takes all the configuration settings out of an centralized configuration store and works after that automaticly. If its need to change the default start page of a webserver, the connection to the database for the applications, etc. with that system it needs just to be changed in the central config store and not on every single machine.

While I am an LDAP advocate and agree that an admin tool for managing
users and groups in LDAP would be an appreciated addition (and maybe
managing printers and such there too), using it as the default would be
way overkill.  There are simply too many problems and it's not easy for
the less experienced to deal with.

It is not ment that with an LDAP Server all the users needs to know about LDIF-files, schema files etc. The goal behind it should be that the users doesn't needs to know all about that. They should can administrate the system as it was bevore.


Felipe Alfaro Solana schrieb:

On Wed, 2003-11-26 at 16:12, Roland Käser wrote:

The redmond bill hat not that many good ideas but the one with the registry was a good one.

I couldn't disagree more. The Windoze registry is a pseudo-monolithic piece of binary information that can't be easily edited, backed up or manually edited in case of corruption or failure. Even GNOME's approach with GConf is still a mess (have you ever tried looking for a config element inside the XML files?)

I don't mind Linux having a lot of configuration files. What I would
like to see is a configuration tool that knows about those files, knows
how to modify them and allows the user to do those changes through a
streamlined, homogeneous user interface.

fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list redhat com

-- Roland Käser Bocksrietstr. 54 8200 Schaffhausen Webmaster www.Israel-Jugendtag.ch

** Schon vom Israel-Jugendtag gehört? **

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]