On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Ronny Aasen wrote:
i only had troubles using "roaming" profiles. I think thats the correct
samba-term for the feature.
roaming profiles, are really bad.
we use roaming profiles for all the windows machienes and realy do
depend on it.
In my opinion the best solution is to educate the users, yes it's the
i think its hell, to educate users how things work for windows&linux on the
the second best is to exclude some things from the profile. eg redirect
my documents to home/priv, and not sync things like IE cache, local
settings and temp areas. (this is very site/application spesific so a
sane default is hard to do)
the third (worst) to disable roming profiles. for other sites this is
perhaps the best solution :)
thats completly the point.
there is _no_, nice solution, and .. for the most people which only use some
windows machines, its the best solution.
An other thing is, if roaming-profiles are disabled by default, nobody gets
hurd. The worst is, that some people are missing the feature. But there are
no quota problems, and there are no other bad things..
and everybody can just enable them.. and if he/she does he has to alter the
windows installation aswell.
Alas needs are allways different, and if some school can afford lisence
costs for windows they should be able to afford the cost of maintaining
them as well. It's not like this is any less a problem on a pure windows
Installations i know, end in chaos, simply because no one knows how to do it
right. On pure window installations you get often told "please don't try to
logon with you user on this machine, because.. there isn't enough diskspace
on the machine, the program 'x' won't work, the server can't take the
And in the end. it's better to stick close to the default and have the
benefit of the huge amount of documentation online, then to create our
own defaults that will be very debian edu spesific, and only change the
group of users that must do manual tweaks.
for me, the majority isn't using roaming profiles. And the problem, that to
use such profiles correctly, the windows machines have to be installed in a
special way (at least some programs) just hardens my point.
ofcourse if 99% wanted to disable profiles i would be inclined to agree,
but i do not think that's the case.