Hi,
THAT would be worhty of being called Fedora.Next .
cu romal
Am 28.01.14 01:35, schrieb Oron Peled:
On Monday 27 January 2014 14:01:32 Stephen Gallagher wrote:
...
or some mechanism to interactively configure and deploy a DHCP server.
IMO, that's exactly the crux of the matter. Most
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Forwarding this to ser...@lists.fedoraproject.org as well. Responses
inline.
On 01/27/2014 07:35 PM, Oron Peled wrote:
On Monday 27 January 2014 14:01:32 Stephen Gallagher wrote:
... or some mechanism to interactively configure and deploy a
On Tuesday 28 January 2014 08:23:46 Stephen Gallagher wrote:
Forwarding this to ser...@lists.fedoraproject.org as well. Responses
inline.
As I'm not on the server list (yet), I replied to both lists.
If devel should be off this thread, just remove it in your next reply
and I'll understand the
On Wed, 2014-01-29 at 01:48 +0200, Oron Peled wrote:
On Tuesday 28 January 2014 08:23:46 Stephen Gallagher wrote:
Forwarding this to ser...@lists.fedoraproject.org as well. Responses
inline.
As I'm not on the server list (yet), I replied to both lists.
If devel should be off this thread,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/28/2014 06:48 PM, Oron Peled wrote:
On Tuesday 28 January 2014 08:23:46 Stephen Gallagher wrote:
Forwarding this to ser...@lists.fedoraproject.org as well.
Responses inline.
As I'm not on the server list (yet), I replied to both lists.
Hi,
might be totaly out of scope for Fedora.next, but this is what I would
like to get better in Fedora.
If I install a Windows-Server with some services like DHCP or file
services, I get a working configuration.
- If I install a Fedora-server with dhcpd, dhcpd doesn't do anything
- If I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/27/2014 01:31 PM, Robert M. Albrecht wrote:
Hi,
might be totaly out of scope for Fedora.next, but this is what I
would like to get better in Fedora.
If I install a Windows-Server with some services like DHCP or file
services, I get a
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 19:31:58 +0100,
Robert M. Albrecht li...@romal.de wrote:
I think this is a real problem. The missing working default-configs
are a real hassle for replacing small servers in Windows-shops with
Linux as the non-expert-Linux-admin has an enormous entry-barrier to
get
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/27/2014 01:50 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 19:31:58 +0100, Robert M. Albrecht
li...@romal.de wrote:
I think this is a real problem. The missing working
default-configs are a real hassle for replacing small servers in
Once upon a time, Robert M. Albrecht li...@romal.de said:
If I install a Windows-Server with some services like DHCP or file
services, I get a working configuration.
Can you be more specific on what you mean by working configuration?
As far as I know, you still have to configure the service on
Most of the services you described do have a working configuration but
the service is not turned on. You are right though, when you install a
Windows CA it's ready to go. In regards to DHCP, the dhcpd.conf file has
a commented sample that needs to be edited and then turned on. Is this
what you
Hi,
dhcpd is just an (maybe bad) example.
But even dhcpd needs a lot of work. I need to configure ranges, options
(which could like gateqway and dns partly automagically gathered from
the exsting network configuration), ... binding dhcpd to bind to enable
dynamic updates, ...
and double
Hi,
if the server sits in a RFC1918 network (192.168.1.0/16), has a static
IP and a configured gateway and DNS, it might be reasonable to assume,
the dhcpd should operate in this range and set the options for DNS and
gateway accordingly.
At least the installation could produce a
Hi,
He's not suggesting turning services on by default just by installing
pacakges (I don't think). I think his request here is similar to our
Fedora Server Roles idea where there are special packages (possibly
meta-packages) that are separate from the simple installed bits. So
you might have
On 27 January 2014 14:01, Robert M. Albrecht li...@romal.de wrote:
Hi,
dhcpd is just an (maybe bad) example.
But even dhcpd needs a lot of work. I need to configure ranges, options
(which could like gateqway and dns partly automagically gathered from the
exsting network configuration), ...
On 27.01.2014 22:01, Robert M. Albrecht wrote:
Hi,
dhcpd is just an (maybe bad) example.
It is good example. See dhcp configuration in your home router - it
requires some attention. Then try some Cisco or HP router and its dhcp
configuration. This smart devices are not so smart to work for
On Jan 27, 2014, at 2:16 PM, Stephen John Smoogen smo...@gmail.com wrote:
The reason why these daemons are not ready to run is that when they used to
be ready to run, they caused problems with whatever environment was already
there. We used to ship tools which could do what was thought to
On 27.01.2014 22:05, Robert M. Albrecht wrote:
Hi,
if the server sits in a RFC1918 network (192.168.1.0/16), has a static
IP and a configured gateway and DNS, it might be reasonable to assume,
the dhcpd should operate in this range and set the options for DNS and
gateway accordingly.
On Monday 27 January 2014 14:01:32 Stephen Gallagher wrote:
...
or some mechanism to interactively configure and deploy a DHCP server.
IMO, that's exactly the crux of the matter. Most non-trivial services
requires some administrative decisions to configure them properly.
Since rpm does not
19 matches
Mail list logo
