Re: [Fwd: Re: YaST2 for Debian (aka nYaST)]
On Wed, 2004-11-24 at 00:28 +0100, Carlos Garnacho wrote:
> It seems the chain error is going on :)
> email message attachment, "Forwarded message - Re: YaST2 for Debian
> (aka nYaST)"
> On Wed, 2004-11-24 at 00:28 +0100, Carlos Garnacho wrote:
> > On сб, 2004-11-20 at 20:56, Carlos Garnacho wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Fri, 2004-11-19 at 10:47 +0100, Rumen Krasstev wrote:
> > > > On чт, 2004-11-18 at 18:26, Carlos Perello Marin wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, 2004-11-18 at 16:35 +0200, Rumen Krasstev wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
<snip>
> > [...]
> > > > > >
> > > Sorry, I don't agree, as the GNOME System Tools maintainer, the worst
> > > obstacle I find for doing new modules is the lack of time/manpower, as
> > > for doing the tools portable, almost every UNIX has the same concepts in
> > > system administration, and the GST can do a good job abstracting such
> > > concepts (for example: the services tool configures successfully sysV,
> > > bsd, filerc, rcng and gentoo init types, and the boot tool does the same
> > > with lilo, grub and yaboot).
> > Excuse me and sorry for misunderstanding, I just have feeling that I remember a mail in GNOME devel mail list, which
> > describes why GNOME rejects to include GST in official distribution before time (I think in 2.5/2.6 or 2.3/2.4)...
> > Probably I'm going wrong but I've feeling that the reason was some modules of GST which didn't work properly at
> > all platforms. That's why I though like that...Furthermore there is only
> > basic modules (great implement I think - excellent work) because there
> > are serious differences between software availability in different
> > architectures (for example one of most wished graphical tool for the
> > masses - the firewall - how would be possible to implement for all
> > architectures that GNOME runs on?). I agree of all that you mentioned,
> > about system administration, but we talk about much more modules (86 in
> > YaST) for much more purposes... Let me say that I'm not so involved in
> > GST and excuse me if I'm going totally wrong :-))) I hope you would
> > explain to us these things, because they are very interesting and GST
> > for me is the only one (not web based) real multiplatform configuration
> > tool for now :-))))
The system tools backends can do quite a good job abstracting concepts
(and in the unix world most of the implementations are based on a same
concept), even the frontends doesn't need to know about implementation
details, it's up to the backends to do what they must with the given
XML.
It's true that the GST were "rejected" in the GNOME Desktop, and one of
the reasons was the lack of distro support [1], but right now all the
included tools in the GST fully support the most important distros/OS
[2] (and many more derived from them) and 2 new tools are in development
(for sharing and for disks formatting), so I think that it proves that
it was only lack of time/manpower/interest/whatever instead of wrong
concepts :)
And regarding the ammount of modules in Yast compared to GST, it's true
that they handle at this moment more things, but I also think that the
equivalence 5-86 is wrong, because there are tools in GST that have the
functionality of several yast modules.
Last of all, it also might be worth saying that GST is being used quite
successfully in large Debian based deployments such as Ubuntu, Linex in
Extremadura, Guadalinex in Andalucia, etc... as GST are the default
configuration tools
Regards
[1] Please also note that when a distro is not supported, gst doesn't
break things, just tells the user that the distro isn't supported, so it
doesn't mean at all that they were unstable
[2] Debian, SuSE, Redhat/Fedora, Mandrake, Slackware, Gentoo,
FreeBSD, ...
> >
> > Regards
> > Rumen
> >
> > ---
> > Rumen Krasstev - Object Builder Software Bulgaria
> > Sofia, 113 Tzarigradsko Shose, phone: +359 2 974 33 16
> > web: http://www.obs.bg, email: rkrastev@obs.bg, icq: 35447386
> > ###I'm using only free or/and open source software###
> > Share the freedom - "Free Software Association - Bulgaria" http://www.fsa-bg.org
> > ---
> >
> >
Reply to: