Re: configuration of debian systems [Was: Re: Unidentified subject!]
Hi all,
I and my friends started a project called Gnome Panel (initially using
Debian, it's what we use! :))
Take a look at http://linuxlabs.lci.ufrj.br/cpanel
and say what you think...
The next week, we will start to work in it again.
Thanks, Paulo Henrique
Quoting Sarel J. Botha (sjb@dundee.lia.net):
> On Tue, Aug 03, 1999 at 01:52:31PM +0200, goswin.brederlow@student.uni-tuebingen.de wrote:
> > Joey's and my work both include forntends for console, whiptail and
> > html. Altough at the moment he is further with his developement. His
> > work looks nice, but it looks more complicated to me, but that might
> > also be my perl knoledges fault.
>
> Didn't know he had one as well ! Sheesh, talk about a lot of proposals. Maybe
> everyone should start working together, then we'll have a working solution in
> weeks !
>
> > > package does look different, that's why I don't have a widget that
> > > covers a whole .conf file, only pieces of it. If you don't
> > > understand what I mean I'll provide some examples :)
> >
> > All proposals so far say that all questions must be asked via one
> > command (dpkg-question in my case). That command gets the kind of
> > question as option and from that deduces the look&feel. The maintainer
> > can only select the meaning of the question not the look&feel. He can
> > say that he wants a font selector or a file selector or a yes/no
> > question. He can also group such questions together as in Joeys
> > implementation, which I find a good idea. A Group of questions would
> > then appear in its own submenu and all questions in a group would be
> > asked together.
>
> ahh, I was thinking along the lines of a GTK configure thingie and maybe later
> one in ncurses that looks like whiptail/dialog. But you're right, the
> maintainer shouldn't have any control over what the front-end looks like; just
> the conf file.
>
> I know one doesn't want a bunch of gtk packages lying on a server boxicle,
> maybe a server + protocol for remote configuring... IMHO that would make
> Debian's configuration really cool.
>
> > Linuxconf needs a C++ module for every package it can configure. I
> > don't know how good the module concept is in respect to different
> > versions, but programming a C++ interface isn't trivial and you have
> > to compile linuxconf for every change to see if it works.
> >
>
> euwww
>
> > In my proposal configuration via a prerecored database is just a
> > different frontend to the overall configration. instead of asking the
> > user, the database will be asked. In fact I want to use the very
> > mechanism to first prerecord the configuration onto a temporary
> > database and only at the end realy do the configuring. That way the
> > system keeps its state until everything is tuned and the suer can
> > cancel if he makes a mistake.
> >
>
> Never thought of it that way. I love _modular_ :))
>
> --
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Sarel Botha | Computer & | +27 341 81341
> (sjb@dundee.lia.net) | Accounting | BOX 2065, Dundee
> | Services | 3000, South Africa
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread!
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-admintool-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
Reply to: