Re: [Setup-tool-hackers] RE: 2.4: System Tools - Please try them

[Carlos Garnacho <garnacho tuxerver net>]

El mar, 03-06-2003 a las 20:15, Seth Nickell escribió:
> On Tue, 2003-06-03 at 04:19, Carlos Garnacho Parro wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2003-06-02 at 14:55, Mark Finlay wrote:
> > >> > Of the top of my head my list of tool that i actually would use as a
> > >> > user are:
> > >> > - Time tool
> > >> > - Network tool / internet connection wizard
> > >> > - Printer tool
> > >> > - Software managment tool
> > >> > - Password changing tool
> > >> >
> > >> > And as an adminstrator:
> > >> > - User tool
> > >> > - Samba tool
> > >> > - NFS tool
> > >> > - Authentication tool
> > >> > - Apache tool
> > >>
> > >> Oh and a services tool - but i really think that this should just work
> > >> too.
> > >
> > > Its an admin tool. The question is "do I want to be running an FTP
> > > server, web server, NFS server, mail server?"
> > 
> > and how could you focus it? I still see necessary the concept of
> > runlevels, so the only proposal I can make is to have separate lists for
> > each relevant runlevel, and an option menu to switch between runlevels. of
> > course the concept should be abstracted as much as we could, for example
> > (in debian):
> > 
> > runlevel 0 ----> stopping the computer
> > runlevel 2 ----> graphical mode
> > runlevel 3 ----> text mode
> > runlevel 6 ----> rebooting the computer
> 
> Most people don't care about the bootup sequence. They care about
> whether the service is running or not. A single checkbox would do just
> fine. It would be especially nice if when you checked the box, the
> service actually started and when you unchecked it, the service stopped
> (and of course, this also effects the "runlevel" settings... however
> RH's setup tool does it). It would be even cooler if there was some way
> to check if the service was running (for services which support this,
> like atalk, httpd, etc) and only show the checkbox as checked if it was.

uuh, well, unfortunately I think that there are distros that just can't
get rid of the priority stuff, redhat relies in chkconfig to do this,
but there are other distributions that don't, in spite of the fact that
they use sysV init too... and not caring about priority could be even
dangerous in those systems :-(

> 
> This gets rid of the distinction between "service runs at bootup" and
> "service is running".
> 
> -Seth
> 
> _______________________________________________
> setup-tool-hackers maillist  -  setup-tool-hackers@lists.ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/setup-tool-hackers
> 
_______________________________________________
setup-tool-hackers maillist  -  setup-tool-hackers@lists.ximian.com
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/setup-tool-hackers