Slashdot Mirror
New Remote Configuration App For Linux
Whyte Wolf writes: "Olympus is a new remote administration suite for Linux. Its currently in development by Mount Linux a company based out of Calgary, Alberta. This is a really neat little product, with some cool ideas (I especially like the NetMessage class) and ofcourse, it's Open Source. They're looking at developing a Windows client to allow Win32 users to administer a Linux system remotely."
-John
Are there any real advantages over Linuxconf. Unless there is a REAL significant advantage over linuxconf, I don't see this beinga good thing. Sure the cryptographic channels are cool but that could be added to Linuxconf. This seems like just more fragmentation of the Linux market (like having GNOME and KDE). Granted, both have pushed the other to be better, but it seems like some serious duplication of efforts. What do you all think?
Any thoughts?
The obvious sarcastic comment is..."Who wants a win32 user to admin a linux system?"
:)
cheers
It's already bad enough when you edit stuff in /etc by hand and Linuxconf chokes on it. Having different admin tools disagree on the proper formatting for these files would drive the inexperienced administrator up a wall.
The veteran admin is so accustomed to using a text editor via telnet he won't consider any other option. Even in situations where it is faster.
Yes such situations do exist.
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
Geeze, this isn't NT we're talking about here. You've been able to remotely administer linux since it got network support. Have these guys ever heard of telnet? Or, for the security minded, ssh? If a shell isn't good enough for you, then how about ssh + linuxconf. Happy now?
:)
Maybe if it was an SSL http interface to linuxconf, that would be something... just so you could administer your machine from a web cafe, if for some reason you felt a need to do so.
The enemies of Democracy are
This software is so far from being complete that they don't have much of anything except a few shots of mockups. They mention that it should not be used for production and that it's nowhere near complete.
This is all part of Linux's slide into the mainstream, and I'm not entirely sure that it's a step in the right direction. All the software does is put a Windows-style GUI on top of an encrypted channel - something anyone with an ssh client and UNIX competency has anyway.
In places, the 'GUI-on-top-of-CLI' is even more apparent, such as the "olympus ping" which simply opens a window with a text box and displays the result of a ping in a different format. That's very helpful, in case you forget how to spell 'ping'.
As a UNIX sysadmin, the notion that this could actually catch on frightens me. This could breed a whole new set of clueless [l]user/admins who don't know what traceroute is, or how to configure a firewall without their precious GUI. What's next, Linux Certification? Linux Certified Engineers?
The last thing the Linux world needs is abstraction of administrative functions via a GUI.
this is a sig.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I belive it's called SSH. =P
----
the pr0n-o-matic http://www.phatmax.net/
It seems to me that one of the things that will forever dog linuxconf is it's inability to keep up with server changes. The manner in which they build modules has them constantly changing a rapidly moving target. It seems that this concept these folks are working on may fall into the same category.
.conf files.
.conf files would still be editable from a text editor or be got at with this somewhat more automated process. Instead of having the author of this API be responsible for keeping up to date with every possible daemon out there, it would be up to the daemon writers to provide a definition file to this API.
This is something I proposed in a Slashdot article a while ago, but it was way late in the conversation. Since this appears to be on topic again, gonna try once again to see what you guys think of it.
The concept revolves around a similar notion to linuxconf in that the idea is to provide a GUI tool for configuring network properties. Instead of trying to develop a unique graphical module for each possible daemon, build an API that looks to definition files. Each of these def files (most likely XML) would contain what text file is used to config a service, what are the possible attributes of that service, and what are the valid values of those attributes. I imagine one could also include the same kind of help text you would normally find in most
Rather than trying to reinvent the GUI for all this, instead provide this API as a means for config GUI's to be written. So whether you're writing a config file for KDE, Gnome, or just X they all call to the same API. The API would handle reading the definition files, and writing to the config files as defined.
From what I'm thinking, the
Good idea, or am I full of it?
The line must be drawn here. This far. No further.
I guess this is what Microsoft means about encouraging innovation; third-party stuff like this is actually useful on Windows. Try to sell it to Linux people, and everybody shrugs and says, "I don't need it. I've got ssh." (or whatever simple, elegant tool fits the task in question)
"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." - Alexander Hamilton
Go with Caldera. They already have Webmin, which is far more robust (and user-friendly).
- I don't care if they globalize against free speech. All my best free thoughts are done in my head.
Struggling back to the point, I'm afraid that as head tech of an IT department that uses Linux boxes, the perils of everyone and their dog (including my boss's PA (who wants to 'get into IT and learn Linux' - oh dear). In fact, as an aside, my boss has decided that she's going to be our new first line support (two week trial). She's never used anything apart from Word in her life. Sweet Jesus help me) wanting to be a sysadmin are very apparent.
I hate to sound like a snob, but people should really keep away from Linux (or any other proper operating system) in a production environment unless they know what they're doing. This does not lend itself to click kiddies fucking everything up because they think they know what the difference is between RAID1 and RAID5.
It may catch on elsewhere, but not in my department...
--- If something doesn't feel right, you're probably not feeling the right thing.
Webmin is currently at 0.8, and is also cross platform. And, for the corporate minded, it falls under the BSD license.
It can be found at http://www.webmin.com/webmin
And no, I do not work for them. I have used the product, and have found it to be really cool. Server administration thru a web browser, using SSL!
Feed The Need[goatse.cx]
WebMin (www.webmin.com) is a full remote configuration tool for Linux (and full UNIXes as well) via a web browser. It's cross platform, open source and much more mature IMHO. Since I started using Webmin, I never even touch Linuxconf any more. I just have no need to - WebMin does EVERYTHING.
This sounds more or less like a pressrelease for a piece of software nobody really wants... /. turning into freshmeat.net ok, but I more or less expected to see 'this advertisment was payed for by ...' under this item...
1. We want more people/companies to use Linux as servers
2. People need to administer servers
With those assumptions in mind, let's look at the people who adminster servers. There are 4 potential categories of server admins.
1. *nix geeks
2. MC*E winders types
3. "other" (isn't Banyan Vines still in business?)
4. Newbies and aspiring server admins
Now, given assumption 1, that we want to see Linux expand, we will need to see a lot more admins be Linux savvy and Linux friendly. All of those future Linux admins will have to come from the 4 categories above. We've got category 1 wrapped up, so if we want more Linux admins it will have to be at the expense of 2, 3 and 4. Ignoring the VMS hold-overs from category 3, this boils down to acheiving 2 things:
1. Converting MC*E types to Linux
2. Convincing new admins that they would really rather do Linux than Winders
Olympus helps in both these cateogries. For the MC*E type, the ability to have access to the Linux box from a Win rig will make them more amenable to setting up a hetrogenous environment. Really, if I had a dollar for every WinAdmin who said they wouldn't consider incorporating Linux in their network because it was too tough to integrate... well, I'd have enough to go see a movie, but damn are movies expensive these days! And don't rattle off at me about Samba. Rattle off at those WinAdmins. Olympus will help gain converts from category 2. Mock MC*E's all you want... but keep in mind they can be converted and "see the light". Olympus will go a long way towards that.
Category 4, new admins, is much more fertile. Lots of aspiring admins go the MCSE route. There are a number of reasons for that, the biggest being that MCSE is an instant credetential. We have responded to that in part with the Red Hat cert. Another major reason for the continued success of NT is the illusion that it is easy to admin (it's an illusion because the troubleshooting of inevitable failures, in the long run, more than make up for the crunchy point-and-click ease of setup). By giving a straighforward config interface to Linux servers we provide newbies with real ease of use. I like to think of this in terms of "total ease of ownership". Once Linux runs, it runs. Easy. Making the config easy is step two.
2 1337 4 u!
The only remote admin tool you need. Well, except for an SSH tunnel to encrypt it.
It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
Sadly, though, Calgary is located on "Aspen Parkland" and "Montane" land and not prarie.... and I doubt "Silicon Aspen Parkland" would catch on.
2 1337 4 u!