On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 4:10 PM, Konstantin Olchanski <olcha...@triumf.ca> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 09, 2012 at 03:44:31PM -0400, Tom H wrote:
>> It's RH's right as a distribution to decide to make us choose between >> vi and nm-connection-editor > > Well, within limits. Otherwise you have user rebelions, etc. I guess they use > Fedora as a thermometer. What user rebellions? We have a few thousand RHEL installs. Do you really think that whoever deals with RH would tell them "our sysadmins are unhappy because system-config-network has been deprecated"? (system-config-network isn't even part of our builds so it's an *really* unlikely scenario!) Someone buys an OS and we configure it to suit the business's needs. That's it. There's no other EL distribution that we can even switch to. There's SUSE but that would reduce the pool of available hires because RHEL dominates the sector. I guess that we could go back to being a Solaris-only shop... Of course, if it's buggy/unstable, hell's raised. >> in the same way that it decided to drop >> sysvinit for upstart in v6 and will almost certainly drop upstart for >> systemd in v7. I've never used any of the system-config-* tools ... > > Another boring shuffle, yawn. I already start all important daemons and do all > non-trivial network configuration from /etc/rc.local. (Obviously > only for stuff one does not need at boot time). > > Would be fun to see them try to deprecate vi and rc.local. It's not a boring shuffle. The systems change will be a major one. Although both upstart and systemd have hybrid modes in which they launch sysvinit scripts, systemd's a pretty radical departure from sysvinit. It even has an integrated logger that might be used to replace the current loggers. I don't think that Fedora uses that logger yet but it might do so soon and then RHEL might get it too. There was a proposal on fedora-devel more or less to start to deprecate the use of "rc.local" by, IIRC/IIUC, not calling it by default as is the case now. I have no idea where the discussion went...