Jamie Strandboge wrote: > On Tue, 2007-08-28 at 16:49 -0400, Mathias Gug wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 03:55:08PM -0400, Jamie Strandboge wrote: >>> My thinking was that I didn't think the samba and nfs-kernel-server >>> packages setup a working share out of the box. I admit I haven't looked >>> at the packaging for these lately. I also didn't think that the samba >>> or nfs package should setup this kind of share by default, because it >>> could be annoying for an experienced sysadmin to always have to disable >>> it or change it. >>> >>> If samba and nfs-kernel-server provide all the debconf functionality to >>> get a working share, then you are absolutely correct to not want to >>> split out the functionality. >> I think they provide the basic functionality. However you cannot setup a >> share. I don't think that configuring a share should be done in the >> postinst package. This is a task that can done multiple times by a >> the sysadmin, on a daily basis. I'm not sure that dpkg --configure >> should be used on a daily basis to manage your system. >> > > I agree-- I don't think it should be done in postinst either, which is > why I thought a simple, small configuration package like > samba-default-shares or nfs-default-exports *might* be appropriate here. > My thinking would be that these packages would not be how you would > normally administer the system (eg to add/remove shares), but rather to > be used to create a simple share for users to use right away. > Experienced admins wouldn't necessarily install these packages, but > rather samba and nfs-kernel-server alone. Inexperienced could install > these (or the tasks) in order to start working right away. > > It is *only* intended to get something up and running in a sane > configuration quickly for the novice admin.
Just my opinion. I think the time would be better spent developing a config/admin tool targeted at the new admin. It would be a more general purpose solution and could become more capable over time. What we /don't/ need are a bunch of handholding GUI apps. If someone is to grow past the "inexperienced" label, they need to get used to the idea that servers don't run GUIs. Something with a curses interface would be ideal, methinks. Again, just my opinion(s). Michael Hipp -- ubuntu-server mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
