Date: Fri, 30 Jan 1998 10:50:32 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com> To: mark@vmunix.com, mike@smith.net.au Cc: config@FreeBSD.ORG, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, kpielorz@tdx.co.uk Subject: Re: FreeBSD updated Installation / Adminsitration Kit Message-ID: <199801301550.KAA29212@lakes.dignus.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mark Mayo <mark@vmunix.com> writes: > > On Fri, Jan 30, 1998 at 01:06:33PM +1030, Mike Smith wrote: > > [SNIP] > > > > It has been decided that FreeBSD could do with a 'replacement' to sysinstall, > > > preferably something graphical, and 'portable'. We have a choice of 3 > > > alternatives, > [SNIP] > > > 2. We write something that will maintain FreeBSD - again with emphasis on ease > > > of use, but including portability (i.e. we want to be able to run this from > > > Windows, other Unix platforms, Alpha workstations, X-servers etc. This is more > > > akin to the Admin tools for something like SCO OpenDesktop etc. - but done > > > properly ;-) > > > > Here you lump together a great number of iterrelated issues. I don't > > think that you're really thought this one through. Terry is much > > closer to the mark with his summary, which comes reasonably close to > > condensing most of the conclusions that've been reached over the years. > > I agree. > > > Bottom line: LDAP is the way to go, however we do it. It is the > > distributed parametric database system that we basically need. > > Once again, I agree. As I mentioned before, I've played with the idea > of a FreeBSD management system in the past, but never had the time to > implement one. I'm not really that interested in writing something that > can be used to install the system - more like something to manage it > effectively when it's up and running. For me, this means a GUI of > some sort, ultimately. IMHO, installing the system and admining it > are two distinct tasks (at least from the user point of view) and > shouldn't necessarily have the same limitations/conditions... > > Background, which will lead to a proposal: > (sorry this is long, but it will be > necesary to establish the motives behind > the proposal....) Ok - just to provide more information on my questionable LDAP reference a while back: The article comes from Computer Reseller News, and is titled: VARs cite LDAP woes -- De factor standard is not enough to ease interoperability snafus. You should be able to find it by looking for LDAP references at http://www.crn.com or http://www.varbiz.com I'm not necessarily suggesting LDAP is "bad" - just providing information... - Dave Rivers -
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199801301550.KAA29212>