FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 05-20-2008, 06:00 PM
Les Mikesell
 
Default

Dotan Cohen wrote:
> 2008/5/20 Derek Broughton <news@pointerstop.ca>:
>> Again, yes. Apache is less of a problem than some servers, in that I can
>> hand edit the configs and test them before restarting Apache, but I'd be a
>> lot happier with a tool that didn't let me write invalid config files in
>> the first place.
>
> It would not be difficult to write a program that parses httpd.conf
> and warns about an invalid file.

Errr, there is one. It's called "httpd -t" and it's unusual among
syntax-checking programs in that it is always in sync with the syntax of
the version of the program you are going to run - since it is the same
thing...

--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@gmail.com

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 05-20-2008, 06:01 PM
Derek Broughton
 
Default

Mike Bird wrote:

> On Tue May 20 2008 09:08:25 Derek Broughton wrote:
>> Still everybody is thinking in terms of particular deficient tools
>> they've
>> seen. Of _course_ the config tool needs to be part of the package
>> providing the application, and so must always be in sync. Given that
>> assumption, it's really rather trivial to ensure that the tool is always
>> capable of modifying every possible configuration setting with every
>> possible value (though rather harder to ensure that it only permits
>> certain combinations).
>
> This thread is degenerating into hyperbole about virtual worlds.
>
> Time to show us the source Derek. Please post a couple of tools
> that you've written that can be used in the manner you advocate
> to maintain my Apache and Postfix configs.

Why? You wouldn't use them, anyway. I'm talking about theory and best
practices, and you're acting like a geek who believes that if an idiot end
user can do it, it isn't unix.
--
derek


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 05-20-2008, 06:05 PM
Mario Vukelic
 
Default

On Tue, 2008-05-20 at 13:43 -0400, Bart Silverstrim wrote:
> Sorry, did I miss the part where you weren't saying you're avoiding a
> method or tool simply because you don't like to do something that may
> associate with you with those lowly primitive mouth-breathing yet often
> well-paid click-monkeys and you have an actual valid reason showing that
> the CLI is inherently better to use in all cases?

Please don't start an unnecessary flamewar by sloppy reading and
inconsiderate replies

I thought I expressed my regret for the poor people who have to endure
such tools and are prevented from improving their skills by them.

My point was that anyone who has ever had to edit a complicated MS
server with its GUI tool knows why CLIs are better suited for that task,
at least for knowledgeable server admins, which frankly anyone should be
who admins a valuable server.
Those who have had to manager 100 servers with GUI tools know even
better.


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 05-20-2008, 06:06 PM
Mario Vukelic
 
Default

On Tue, 2008-05-20 at 13:48 -0400, Paul wrote:
> May I suggest taking it to private email please?

It's still a technical discussion, I think. You are of course free to
simply collapse the thread in your mail reader or filter it away.


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 05-20-2008, 06:08 PM
Derek Broughton
 
Default

Dotan Cohen wrote:

> 2008/5/20 Derek Broughton <news@pointerstop.ca>:
>> Again, yes. Apache is less of a problem than some servers, in that I can
>> hand edit the configs and test them before restarting Apache, but I'd be
>> a lot happier with a tool that didn't let me write invalid config files
>> in the first place.
>
> It would not be difficult to write a program that parses httpd.conf
> and warns about an invalid file.

That was the point - apache actually has that.

> It could probably even be integrated
> into VI. Other config file types (fstab, xorg.conf, etc) could be
> added as well. I'll add it to my list of projects...

And then you'd have something equivalent to webmin... :-)
--
derek


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 05-20-2008, 06:11 PM
Derek Broughton
 
Default

Mario Vukelic wrote:

> On Tue, 2008-05-20 at 13:08 -0300, Derek Broughton wrote:
>> But as someone who has brought down major
>> banking systems by making the wrong config change
>
> I guess you wouldn't want to tell me the name of the bank so I can avoid
> them? If they are making live changes on important systems without
> testing them in a test rig first, I don't trust them with my money,
> either.

What do you do when there's a problem that's going to bring the system down,
eventually, anyway? You try to head it off. In any case the bank has been
bought out, and I haven't worked there for a decade anyway.
--
derek


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 05-20-2008, 06:13 PM
"Steve Lamb"
 
Default

On Tue, May 20, 2008 10:59 am, Derek Broughton wrote:
> Avi Greenbury wrote:

>> But if I'm editing something where I *know* the value I want, and where
>> I want to put it, I really can't think of anything more efficient than
>> opening the file up, putting the right value in the right place and
>> saving the file.

> A web page with a drop down box and a text field would be more _efficient_.

According to who's measure?

vim - 8Mb.

Apache - 13-20Mb
Firefox - 80Mb

Certainly not space.

Certainly not keystrokes since chances are the URL itself is longer than
the entire operation in a text editor.

Certainly not time since I can open a terminal, ssh over, edit the file
and save it before I can even load FF.

--
Steve Lamb


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 05-20-2008, 06:14 PM
Mario Vukelic
 
Default

On Tue, 2008-05-20 at 14:59 -0300, Derek Broughton wrote:
> A web page with a drop down box and a text field would be more _efficient_.

You have obviously never seen a vi wizard work.

> Why? That smacks of really poor programming in the first place. Computer
> programming is deterministic - whenever "X" happens, then "Y" (OK, not
> entirely true, as you can add randomness, but the whole purpose of config
> files is usually to enforce determinism). Any deterministic system can be
> completely modeled, and so there should, in theory, be _nothing_ that a
> power user would want to configure that can't be done with a config tool
> that would prevent him doing it incorrectly.

But some configs are perfectly valid in situation A, but break your box
or network in situation B. A hand-holding tool generally cannot know the
difference and has to strike a balance between being either too lenient
and fail at user protection, or being too strict and fail at getting the
job done -- which it not a choice that can ever be correct. Remember, we
are talking about server admin level stuff here; everyone is in
agreement that GUI tools are great for simple tasks that _every user
must be able to do.


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 05-20-2008, 06:14 PM
Paul
 
Default

On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 2:06 PM, Mario Vukelic <mario.vukelic@dantian.org> wrote:

On Tue, 2008-05-20 at 13:48 -0400, Paul wrote:

> May I suggest taking it to private email please?



It's still a technical discussion, I think.
That's nice.* It isn't a discussion about Ubuntu.
*

You are of course free to

simply collapse the thread in your mail reader or filter it away.
Well...filtering "Debian" or "mailinglist" would most likely filter more than what I want.





--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 05-20-2008, 06:14 PM
Derek Broughton
 
Default

Paul wrote:

> On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 1:43 PM, Bart Silverstrim
> <bsilver@chrononomicon.com> wrote:
>
>> My statement so far appears to still be valid. No one is arguing
>> anything other than the implementation of tools that currently exist,
>> and no one has yet to produce a valid argument that wizards, graphical
>> configurators, and CLI tools cannot coexist depending on the situation
>> at hand.
>
> This is getting ridiculous.

There's something ridiculous about that? Bart's the only person who
actually seems to understand the importance of the thread.
>
> May I suggest taking it to private email please?

Some people are overly sensitive. Bart has a very good point, about
software that's important to Ubuntu. If you don't like to read it, delete
and move on.
--
derek


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 10:54 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org