FC2 and general LDAP Support

[Roland Käser]

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.

Roland



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 at redhat.com
>http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
>  
>

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

******************************************
 ** Schon vom Israel-Jugendtag gehört? **
******************************************
                   www.israel-jugendtag.ch