Re: About using Linuxconf
On Tue, 24 Dec 1996, Richard G. Roberto wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Dec 1996, Shaya Potter wrote:
>
> >
> > I know a few months ago people were saying that linuxconf wouldn't work
> > with debian b/c of the upgradability issue. I have been talking to the
> > developer and he has as new system called dropins. There 'dropins' are
> > each like a rc.d script (from what I can tell) except linuxconf has more
> > control over them. I am including his web page that explains 'dropins'
> > vs. SysV type rc.d scripts.
> >
> > Hope this assuages all your fears and maybe convinces you that linuxconf
> > is a good idea.
> >
>
> Its convinced me that its not, although I was a fan of the idea
> until I heard this.
>
> SysV init scripts are used everywhere -- not just in linux. I
> think that putting system configuration control in the hands of a
> utility such that it is impossible (or even just more difficult
> than it is already) to administer systems _without_ the utility
> is a bad idea. I also think that moving away from SysV init
> scripts puts linux in a position further away from mainstream
> unices, which I also think is a bad idea. Offering this tool as
> a .deb for those who wish to use it is surely a good idea, but I
> think it would be a mistake to base the Debian distribution on it
> in place of SysV init style startups.
What's the difference than scripts, if your init package dies the scripts
are basically useless. If linuxconf dies the drop-ins are useless. From
what I have read, the dropin file seems very simple to understand and
that is also all you have to do drop the file in the directory and
linuxconf will take care of the rest.
The only difference I see is that scripts are actually executable. This
also has the negative effect that their are more things that can go wrong
in their execution.
However, if you don't like this, this shouldn't preclude using
linuxconf. I think it is set up to use the sysv scripts that are already
on the system.
Also, you/(we/debian developers) may want to talk with the linuxconf
developer b/c linuxconf has many other good features once you get by the
way it boots a system.
However, if I remember correctly the main concern people had with
linuxconf was that it didn't seem automatically upgradable, more that it
was stuck in the slackware mode of being basically never changed (at
least automatically). This should change that.
Also, Linuxconf provides 4 ways of configuring the system X,console
graphics,cmd line, web based. This provides many different routes to
maintaining the system, much more than we have right now.
I didn't understand what you meant by it being harder to
maintain/administer the system w/o the utility. It is just as much a
utility as sysvinit is a utility. From what I understand it in reality
is like a replacement init. The utility part is just that it makes the
system easier to configure (using the methods I mentioned b/4). Also it
should be, IMHO, just as easy to administer the dropins as the scripts
are now. It even might be easier b/c lets say I change a file that
inetd uses. Linuxconf will realize this (if the dropin says to monitor
that file) and restart inetd automatically. IMHO, this will Debian much
easier for new users to unix to use.
I thought one of our goals is to be the easiest distribution to use, and
I think this tool/program would make our system many more times easier to
use.
Shaya
--
Shaya Potter
spotter@itd.nrl.navy.mil
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com
Reply to: