On Mon, 31 Jan 2000, Thomas Charron wrote:
> Yep, it's a whole world better then the old days of downloading Slackware
> install floppies on a 9600 baud modem.. ;-P But in oder to get to the point
> of mass acceptence, a user shouldn't have to look at the docs. I know, I know,
> it's one of the worst things to say, but my mom certainly doesn't want to read
> about /dev/hda1, etc.. ;-P
Have you done a RH6.1 install? It's entirely point and click, and you
don't need to know anything about your hardware, so long as the stuff you
have is well supported. If you do a standard WS install, I think you have
exactly 5 options to click on, and your system is DONE!
> Closer and closer every day. The proplem I see here is, it's not really a
> *Linux* problem, as much as it is a *developers* mindset problem. As helish as
I agreed entirely with you until you said this:
> it is, under Win32 *everything* uses the registry, and
> adding/updating/maintaining the values contained in it is much easier. A
I'm not even going to comment on that... :)
What I will say is that I think the guys who develop the distributions
need to be more aware of system administration issues than they are.
That's definitely an issue I've been keenly aware of with RedHat.
Slackware not so much, but then you administer that (or did) just like any
old Unix.
> developer reading the registry only needs to know the key names, that it. From
> there, they go through the OS to retrieve/set these values. Primarily, using a
> key/value system, there is no file format to deal with, and hence, no parsing
> involved.. The registry itself would be a *VERY* nice thing, if the OS did
> more maintence and watchdogging of it.
I definitely can't support that. One of the nice things that Unix does is
make all its configuration easy by putting the config options in ascii
text files. The registry is a mess. And try fixing it remotely.
> More generic graphical interfaces to system management. 'Point and Click'
> does have its virtues. Linuxconf and several other packages are prime examples
> of this need being addressed. What I'd like to see is for Distributers, such
> as RedHat, building linuxconf modules for as many packages as can be
> configured, providing a unified interface to nearly everything. Linuxconf
> could become the 'Control Panel' of linux.
I agree there too, though I don't especially like the layout of linuxconf.
But having a central app to manage all that would be a great feature for
non-techies. So long as it is remotely accessible (which linuxconf is...)
> That's a tough one. The one thing I've learned is, don't join something
> becouse you think it's cool, or neat, but something that truely personally
> interests you. Join as a tester, etc, for the cool and neat projects, but I've
> seen to many times where someone gets involved in a project, loses interest,
> and simply stops. While this isn't a 'bad thing' really, I think that having
> developers devote their interests to something that really get them going is
> the best place for their energy to be put.. Just MHO, though..
Yeah I agree, but I think for me there's a lot of area covered by that.
My enthusiasm probably wouldn't dwindle so long as I'm doing something
productive to make Linux better. I just don't want to write docs... :)
--
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" "Who watches the watchmen?"
-Juvenal, Satires, VI, 347
Derek D. Martin | Senior UNIX Systems/Network Administrator
Arris Interactive | A Nortel Company
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------------------
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
