Thanks Mike - you are right (I was just writing from my memory and what I read on the discussion forum), DNS does exist in LS but there seems to have been lots of problems with it. I was just trying to warn folks to read the Apple discussion forums before upgrading (more of a downgrade if you ask me ;-) so there will be no surprises. A couple of folks on there have upgraded thinking it would be an upgrade and things would generally work out better to end up wasting many many hours/days and having to revert back to SLS.
I recommend anyone tempted by LS just scan the topics on the LS discussion forum: <http://discussions.apple.com/community/servers_enterprise_software/mac_os_x_lion_server?view=discussions#> And perhaps these: <https://discussions.apple.com/message/16004795#16004795> <https://discussions.apple.com/message/15775698#15775698> Here's a quote: > Lion Server simply drops about half the previous functionality of the product > while adding a badly designed and completely unnecessary additional > administrative app. What remains is simplified in the same sense that a > lobotomy "simplified" Francis Farmer. > > "Where's DNS?" It's gone. > "How do I support multiple domains?" You don't. > "But I absolutely need to run multiple, differently configured websites!" > Tough luck. > > I can only assume this is in keeping with Apple's decision to stop building > server hardware – it's abandoned IT as a market, but believes some > unspecified group of people won't mind spending a small sum to play with a > strangely crippled server product. and > I agree fully. We've decided to DROP apple as a server platform, and highly > doubtful we'll be back. Why would I buy a toy that's made for someone living > in there basement. ... can you tell I'm choked about Lion Server?... Have > been running a lot of Mac servers over the last decade, and I mean a lot, but > this latest move by Apple to make a single domain unit has to be the dumbest > thing I've seen yet. Yeah, I can do it manually, or install webmin etc etc... > but that's not why I purchased the darn SERVER VERSION in the first place > ...... Linux here we come!!!... grrrrrrr Of course, there are always good / bad / extreme posts and everyone has different needs so there mileage will vary. Cheers, Ashley. On 03/11/2011, at 11:37 PM, Mike Friedman wrote: > It's absolutely untrue that Lion server doesn't include such things as DNS. > However, you DO have to install the Server Admin tools separately (which is > stupid, Apple! Why do you have to make things extra difficult and then not > document them?). Open Directory could not work without DNS running, so it has > to be there. > > I think they are stupidly trying to hide things from novices that don't > concern those of us who do this for a living. > > I have not done an SL to L upgrade yet (I have one pending) but I did a brand > new install of Lion Server and everything functions just fine. It's a pretty > simple setup so far (no web or mail, but that's coming). > > > On Nov 3, 2011, at 7:48 AM, Neil Laubenthal wrote: > >> I've heard several reports that echo what both Jesse and Ashley have said . >> . .I guess the main idea is that SL Server and Lion Server are different >> cats (in more ways than one:-) and you need to make sure that whichever you >> use does whatever you need it to do. >> >> I would tend to agree with Ashley's recommendation not to try upgrading from >> SLS to LS . . .but then I was a systems administrator by trade for the last >> 20 years before I recently retired . . .and I would _never_ upgrade a >> server OS. They're always installed, patched, secured, and configured from >> scratch although I will export/import config files to make things >> easier/quicker. I still haven't decided whether to use Lion server or not . >> . .I guess I could splurge and spend the 50 bucks and test it to find out . >> . .but think I'll download the docs and check out all the goodies first . . >> .what I primarily want are portable home directories and a better >> permissions model for shared folders. I'm currently using regular Lion as a >> home file server and there are issues with permissions if say I save a file >> and then my wife needs to modify it. I've worked a round this by using a >> common service account to mount the shared data volume on both of our >> laptops but that solution is less than elegant so it's irritating. >> >> >> On Nov 3, 2011, at 9:41 AM,11/3, Jesse Tayler wrote: >> >>> Just as a note, I haven't had any issues and am fine with Lion server. >>> >>> >>> On Nov 2, 2011, at 10:54 PM, Ashley Aitken wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> WARNING: Do NOT (try to) upgrade a Snow Leopard Server installation to >>>> Lion Server until you have read the posts on Apple's OS X Lion Server >>>> discussion list. >>>> >>>> From what I've read there Mac OS X Lion Server is something pretty much >>>> everyone should stay away from. It's beta at best, lots of things are >>>> problematic, it just doesn't work in a lot of cases, and lots of >>>> functionality was lost from Snow Leopard server (e.g. DNS, virtual web >>>> hosts, ...) and there are many limitations (e.g. one local subnet). >> >> >> ----------------------------------------------- >> There are only three kinds of stress; your basic nuclear stress, cooking >> stress, and A$$hole stress. The key to their relationship is Jello. >> >> neil >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> MacOSX-admin mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/macosx-admin > > > > > ======================= > Mike Friedman > MGF Consulting > Computers without Attitude > http://www.mgfconsulting.net > 415-823-9990 > Instant Message AIM/Yahoo: sfmike64 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > MacOSX-admin mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/macosx-admin -- Ashley Aitken Perth, Western Australia Skype/iChat: MrHatken (GMT + 8hrs!) _______________________________________________ MacOSX-admin mailing list [email protected] http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/macosx-admin
