Hi, I listened to FLOSS Weekly episode 62 [1] and the topic was eBox - please listen [3] to it if you are interested in this topic.
AFAIK eBox gives you a is web interface for easy configuration of Ubuntu/Debian boxes, it is like Webmin on crack :) I would really love to see something like this for Fedora based systems... Also I don't see why they need to be based only on Debian/Ubuntu I know that there are differences in RedHat and Debian based distros but if they made all necessary work I guess that it would be simple to implement the differences so that it also works on Fedora and RedHat based systems...
So what you think about this project? Would this be beneficial to Fedora? Why?
Some more info about eBox:
What is eBox? eBox is a server for the easy administration of corporate networks. It covers a wide range of functionality from network gateway to communication center or file management. It has been conceived and developed with simplicity in mind, lowering the learning curve for new network administrators and saving time for experienced professionals. It helps optimizing time for system administrators by automating most of the tasks. Moreover, eBox includes a development framework that allows for the easy adaptation to new unforeseen needs. eBox takes into account that security depends more on user’s actions than on technology itself and thus, its configuration is secure by default. The result is a platform that boosts the productivity of system administrators while keeping a high level of security in corporate networks.
[1] http://twit.tv/floss62 [2] http://ebox-platform.com/ [3] http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/twit.cachefly.net/FLOSS-062.mp3
Cheers, Valent.
On Wed, 1 Apr 2009 13:35:59 +0200 Valent Turkovic wrote:
AFAIK eBox gives you a is web interface for easy configuration of Ubuntu/Debian boxes, it is like Webmin on crack :)
My impression of every "easy" linux admin interface I've ever seen it that it requires millions of man hours to create a useful interface which will be used by newbies 3 or 4 times till they learn it takes 10 times longer to bring up the fancy interface than it does to just use vi to edit the dadgum /etc/resolv.conf file (or whatever file is involved :-).
Then the linux developers, terrified that someone might have learned how to administer a system decide they need to rip everything apart and utterly change it - changes which are never reflected in the easy admin interface (things like network -> NetworkManager, xorg.conf -> weird /etc/fdi files for hal, etc).
My impression of every "easy" linux admin interface I've ever seen it that it requires millions of man hours to create a useful interface which will be used by newbies 3 or 4 times till they learn it takes 10 times longer to bring up the fancy interface than it does to just use vi to edit the dadgum /etc/resolv.conf file (or whatever file is involved :-).
Then the linux developers, terrified that someone might have learned how to administer a system decide they need to rip everything apart and utterly change it - changes which are never reflected in the easy admin interface (things like network -> NetworkManager, xorg.conf -> weird /etc/fdi files for hal, etc).
Speaking like a true admin ;) From my point of view as advanced-user-and-admin-of-my-own-machines this looks like a really nice project... at least for setting up some services and getting them working fast and then learning how they work by looking at config files.
I know, I know that should be reversed... but there is nothing more rewarding and further stimulation for learning than when something "JustWorks"tm. If I try something and fail misserably I tend to put it down - and usually don't pick it up again. But if something "JustWorks"tm I get positive stimulus to continue hacking on it ;)
Just my 2c.
ps. Still this could be really usefull tool even for "real" admins that know how to thinks by hand but have hundreds of boxes on which then need to change one simple thing... this would same them lots of time...
On Wed, 2009-04-01 at 08:21 -0400, Tom Horsley wrote:
Then the linux developers, terrified that someone might have learned how to administer a system decide they need to rip everything apart and utterly change it - changes which are never reflected in the easy admin interface (things like network -> NetworkManager, xorg.conf -> weird /etc/fdi files for hal, etc).
We've seen this with Webmin and Linuxconf. After a while, the things it controls change, yet it doesn't keep step. It could only control things if you didn't hand modify files, as it required the config files to be formatted in a very specific way (e.g. with indented spaces, and special comments, and command options in specific orders). That also precluded letting any other application modify configuration files, for the same reason.
The gnome-control-centre, was a somewhat better approach. It was just a collection of icons for control panels. The icons would launch the control panel application that already existed for the application, the application's *own* control gadget, not a third-party thing. Of course that's only useful for configuring the local machine, simultaneously remote controlling a fleet of machines needs a different approach.
Such idiot interfaces tend to omit something else - adequate explanations of what you're fiddling with. So they're not of much use to the clueless, anyway.
On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 02:39 +1030, Tim wrote:
On Wed, 2009-04-01 at 08:21 -0400, Tom Horsley wrote:
Then the linux developers, terrified that someone might have learned how to administer a system decide they need to rip everything apart and utterly change it - changes which are never reflected in the easy admin interface (things like network -> NetworkManager, xorg.conf -> weird /etc/fdi files for hal, etc).
We've seen this with Webmin and Linuxconf. After a while, the things it controls change, yet it doesn't keep step. It could only control things if you didn't hand modify files, as it required the config files to be formatted in a very specific way (e.g. with indented spaces, and special comments, and command options in specific orders). That also precluded letting any other application modify configuration files, for the same reason.
---- Yes obviously on linuxconf...probably way before 70% of the list users experience.
Webmin, true to some extent but I use it anyway and I love it.
Yes, Webmin will rearrange my highly organized smb.conf if I were to use it to make changes to smb.conf but I don't. For other things, such as maintaining named.conf, dhcpd.conf, I wouldn't want to live without it though I could. But I've never seen Webmin render 'conf' files unusable - just that it has its own method of rearranging and in my case, where I pretty much have a determined setup that doesn't much vary from network to network, it's just easier to maintain using a normal text editor and keep it in the organization that makes sense to me.
Craig
On Wed, 2009-04-01 at 11:46 -0500, Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:
Craig White wrote:
Yes obviously on linuxconf...probably way before 70% of the list users experience.
Now you are making me feel old!
---- sure, blame the messenger...I suspect that the truth is more likely that you are old.
Craig
On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 06:15 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Craig White wrote:
sure, blame the messenger...I suspect that the truth is more likely that you are old.
Hmmm, is 25 old? ;-) I used linuxconf at some point where it was still the RHL configuration tool. Of course I was like 15 or 16 at the time. :-)
---- I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now.
Red Hat time line suggests that RHL 6.1 was 10 years ago which to my recollection is about when it became completely unusable.
Craig
Kevin Kofler wrote:
Craig White wrote:
sure, blame the messenger...I suspect that the truth is more likely that you are old.
Hmmm, is 25 old? ;-) I used linuxconf at some point where it was still the RHL configuration tool. Of course I was like 15 or 16 at the time. :-)
Gee, when I was 16, I was using BASIC on a GE Mark235 via a 55baud teletype. :)
We got our hands on FORTRAN later that year, and the paper tape reader on the newer 110baud teletype just screamed!
If it is not too much to ask could someone of more experinced admins listen to the show (links provided in first email) and then give your opinion about eBox? There is aproximately 15-20minutes of interesting part, you can skip trought the rest.
I would love to hear your oppinion after you have heard from the developers of eBox what is this project really about.
Cheers, Valent.
Valent Turkovic wrote:
If it is not too much to ask could someone of more experinced admins listen to the show (links provided in first email) and then give your opinion about eBox? There is aproximately 15-20minutes of interesting part, you can skip trought the rest.
I would love to hear your oppinion after you have heard from the developers of eBox what is this project really about.
ebox - the developers I mailed a long time back had developed it with Debian systems in mind and were not interested in integrating it with other distributions. It would require someone to invest a good amount of time with code and packaging to let it run on Fedora. Listening to podcasts isn't changing that.
Rahul