On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:56:33 +1100 Jamie Wilkinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This one time, at band camp, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >I've looked at cfengine a few times and been mostly > >baffled by it. It has it's own scripting language > >instead of using python or perl. > > cfengine's language isn't a scripting language. Well, cfengine docs relentlessly refer to 'scripting' cfengine and cfengine scripts, so if it quacks like a duck ... I know it's meant to be really high level and declarative, but the fact is that a lot of what it does is also lower level and better done by more standard scripting languages. In fact I think I read somewhere that the only reason it isn't perl/python is that cfengine predates those two. I've also seen mentions of people re-implementing something like cfengine, but with python or perl. > It also isn't what > Martin wants -- the things he asked for are possible with cfengine but > require so much work; he'd be better off with an actual RPC mechanism. Yeah, true. I only mentioned in passing because Michael Chesterton mentioned it. (points) RPC is to low level I think. A higher level possible development path would be to use Jini or corba. heh. -- Matt PS heh because jini is something that seems to have failed spectacularly. -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
