On Mon 02 Jul 2018 at 20:39:33 (+0100), Joe wrote: > On Mon, 2 Jul 2018 14:02:31 -0500 > David Wright <deb...@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote: > > > On Mon 02 Jul 2018 at 19:50:35 (+0200), deloptes wrote: > > > David Wright wrote: > > > > > > > Well, it's always difficult to know what the OP¹ is really after. > > > > The ?first time this came up (17 months ago), "minimal" was in > > > > the subject line, sqlite was looked at favourably, but the fact > > > > that it had a web interface was seen as a downer, perhaps because > > > > the word "web" appeared to contradict "no networking". > > > > > > But sqlite does have only CLI interface - the rest is not > > > mandatory. > > > > I agree, and the OP¹ has frequently said that CLIs are ok. > > But the OP¹ voraciously consults HOWTOs, and said: > > > > "Many presume a WEB-SERVER is involved." > > > > I don't know what others glean from this, but to me it sounds as if > > the mention of "web" taints the software somehow, perhaps > > subconciously. > > Rightly so. If you don't currently run a web server, then needing to do > so just to administer an unrelated application would seem illogical, > not to mention annoying.
I wrote "any *mention* of web" might put off the OP¹. Nothing about *needing to*. The fact that many *want to* makes it a popular topic for HOWTOs, but it's not a need. > Today, the vast majority of database applications also involve a web > server, so there's usually no extra overhead in using it for database > administration. But that's not true for everyone. Virtually every PC runs a browser of some sort, and almost all browsers contain a database application. But most people aren't running a web server on their PC. Now, many electronic devices of all varieties are sold with extremely perfunctory built-in interfaces and require an external browser to exploit their full functionality (see below). Most of us use one: our router. But the web *server* is in the device, not in people's PC. > And if you have an application for a database management system of some > kind, then that application itself is surely the main method of > manipulating the DBMS. You need very little extra administration, > particularly in Debian where databases, users and privileges are > generally set up automagically. This is why I'm not particularly fluent > with the mariadb command line: I might use it two or three times a > year, and I always have to read up on it again when I do. With sqlite, the commandline is not something that you're forced to use to administrate the DB (there's no such concept anyway); it's a choice, just one method of accessing it. You could use Debian's sqlitebrowser exclusively, or one of the language bindings, according to preference. The fact is that the model: Device in a clean shiny box PC/Mobile _________________________________________ __________________ | | WiFi | | | functionality ↔ sqlite db ↔ web server | ←----→ | Browser | |________________________________________| |________________| is popping up everywhere nowadays, so it's hardly surprising that some tutorials focus on this, and the same holds for models involving client/server DBs too, so more tutorials on that. It's popular, but it's not a requirement. I googled simple sqlite example and one of the top hits was http://www.sqlitetutorial.net/ Looking that over, I can't see anthing to put the OP¹ off². For someone coming from dBASEII and wanting to learn about modern Relational DataBase Management Systems, it would seem a perfect fit (to repeat myself). I can't see the desirability of the client/server model in the OP¹'s situation as it just adds a layer of administrative complexity for no payback. Perhaps I'm reading the wrong meaning of their "minimal". Still awaiting counterexamples. ² OTOH for this post, the diagram above might be offputting. Cheers, David.