On Mon, 2007-11-19 at 10:27 -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Nov 19, 2007 7:07 AM, Lubomir Kundrak lkundrak@redhat.com wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, 2007-11-19 at 01:18 -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
I have expressed my ideas[1] to add and rework some of the functionality of the system-config tools with the hope of making them a bit more innovative and useful.
Please comment on the idea.
Rework (not a total rewrite) system-config tools use a common virtual console which abstracts away local and remote console usage. Anticipated benefits:
* transparently handle local or remote console (via ssh) o allow configuration of remote services
this is possible now: ssh -X my.server system-config-httpd
One question: I know about this method, but have never tried it myself
- doesn't it require an xserver on the host?
It does not. Why would it?
One comment: The crowd that really love the system-config tools would like prefer not to be doing x forwarding via SSH
Why? Wasn't it the reason why X forwarding was born? Well, he can do that without the forwarding, by just setting DISPLAY, with no obvious benefits :)
o possible allow for OS independent usage (example: system-config-httpd could be used from Windows XP)
You can do the very same thing from Windows XP.
I was thinking more in terms of the user just running system-config-* on Fedora|Windows|* and just enter in a host and passkey|user+pass and make changes to the target system
Well, it needs some fixes in Windows upstream. Until it happens, cygwin/X is comfortable enough.
o allow for those who prefer not to run server tools with a X server installed to make use of the system-config tools
None of the system-config-* tools depends on X server except for system-config-display.
True, but you do generally need a GUI to make use of the GUI system-config tools
Will the proposed changes make me use the tools without a graphical interface? Is the proposal about providing a TUI for each tool?