Re: purposes
"John van V." <john_van_v@yahoo.com> writes:
> > > about the unix/nt comparisson:
> > > with nt one thing is easy possible: delegate some task to someone who
> > > is not a skilled administrator.
> >
> > And see him go crazy trying to fix something, e.g. installing NT on
> > drives with >1024 cylinders after a crash.
> >
> > Get alife. If you have a problem with NT it gets difficult and you
> > don't even have logfiles that are as detailed as with linux.
> Linux has to support NT for a simple reason, we want to get onto
> their boxes to replace NT. If we break NT then Linux is off that
> box possibly forever. If we succeed then there is a tremendous
> likelyhood that NT will never be booted again.
<grin> Yes, I like that :)
> This comes to the need for an easier to use LILO, there was a project called
> GRUB but that fell by the wayside.
You can boot linux from the NT bootloader, but you can't boot NT from
lilo (as far as I know). If you use lilo, you will get two
prompts. Debian should come with documentation on how to put linux
into the NT bootloader.
> In a way the goal is to eliminate the Sys Admin on the local box,
> giving every body the ability to run things themselves.
> >The problem is finding them as a user needing them. :) Nearly every
> >tool has been programmed for unix.
>
> I am going to the perl conference this week, I am going to propose a micro perl
>
> which I believe is the perfect standard for admin. Perl, like a lot of other
> stuff is bloated, hence the need for a micro. Among advantages of perl, is the
> fact that the scripts are tiny themselves and fully portable to TK.
And absolutly unchangeable and unfixable in 99% of all cases. Theres
just no clean structure in perl code most of the time.
Thats the greates advantage and the greatest drawback of perl.
May the Source be with you.
Goswin
Reply to: