Announcing Fedora 11 Alpha (blink)

[Jerry Amundson]

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Jesse Keating <jkeating at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-02-10 at 23:24 -0600, Jerry Amundson wrote:
>>
>> A screwed up, hung, console wrecks my plan for Linux World Domination.
>> And no-one can deny that the X tools have the same basic goal.
>> Usability, even for technical tasks.
>
> Regardless of how the X is recovered, once hung, the damage is done.  We
> need to work on not having a hang, rather than squabbling about how to
> recover from the hang.

True.

>> The alternate VT, kill, restart, is more work for me.
>> The X -config, change zap setting, is more work for me.
>> The server reboot looks bad to everyone.
>> If my employer sees me working more, they buy less Linux - the Windows
>> servers are faster to administer in their eyes.
>
> The laughing started when you were using X directly on the server
> machine to configure it.  Why?  That's why X is network aware and
> graphical tools are easily reached either through exported X connection
> (ssh).  Aside from VNC, there is no need for X itself to run on your
> server, so any kind of graphical glitch would be on the client side, and
> a reboot there isn't nearly as laughable as rebooting the server itself
> and causing downtime.

Excellent point! I've now had my epiphany regarding C-A-Bs in X, as I
did with SElinux several weeks ago. The good of the disabled case
outweighs the bad with C-A-Bs enabled, in my new opinion.

> Of course, configuration changes shouldn't be done without scheduled
> downtime anyway, even if it doesn't get used.
>
> Trying to argue that one can't easily reset the X server on a running
> server will cause Linux to fall out of favor in the data center is
> laughable at best.

OK, that seemed to be a great deal of laughing at my expense, but I'm
OK with it. :-)
Thanks for your patience. I really should have thought this through,
rather than focusing on the X desktop in front of me.

preferring beer over mai-tai's anyway,
jerry