Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: OT: Linus ranting about Gnome3
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2012 00:02:57
Message-Id: CA+czFiCfF_EwBVd63P6cuZpMMp8OESG723DpBAuL7NNxh=xUnw@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: OT: Linus ranting about Gnome3 by Matthew Finkel
1 On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Matthew Finkel
2 <matthew.finkel@×××××.com> wrote:
3 > On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com> wrote:
4 >>
5 >> On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 6:42 PM, Matthew Finkel
6 >> <matthew.finkel@×××××.com> wrote:
7 >> > On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 5:30 PM, Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com> wrote:
8
9 [snip]
10
11 >> >>
12 >> > True, and they've been working "hard" to get it to the state it is in
13 >> > now.
14 >> > In many cases, sys admins have had to unlearn relying on their mouse
15 >> > for complete power. The CLI provides options that are, obviously, very
16 >> > difficult
17 >> > to express in a simple GUI (I know I'm preaching to the choir).
18 >> > Powershell
19 >> > has
20 >> > made huge progress in this respect, but it still has a long way to go in
21 >> > order to
22 >> > compete with what we have. And I doubt the server environment would ever
23 >> > become stripped down to the state we're talking about.
24 >>
25 >> Actually, they're there as of Windows Server 2008. It's called
26 >> "Windows Server 2008 Core". According to "Windows Server 2008: The
27 >> Definitive Guide", you log into one of these systems and all you get
28 >> (by default) is a terminal window with an instance of cmd.exe. It goes
29 >> on to list seven server roles this configuration supports:
30 >>
31 >> * Active Directory and Active Directory Lightweight Domain Services (LDS)
32 >> * DHCP Server
33 >> * DNS Server
34 >> * File Services (including DFSR and NFS)
35 >> * Print Services
36 >> * Streaming Media Services
37 >> * Windows Server Virtualization
38 >>
39 >> (Curiously, one of the things you _can't_ do is run Managed Code.)
40 >
41 >
42 > Huh, I didn't know about this. It's still too limited, though. At least
43 > they've
44 > duplicated a lot of the core gui elements on cli.
45
46 I dunno. That's everything I might possibly want a Windows system for.
47 DNS comes with AD. Their DHCP server is probably the best on the
48 market right now; it's the only common one[1] which handles DDNS
49 updates for IPv4 and IPv6 hosts in the same domain. Everything else, I
50 can easily do as-well-or-better on a Linux box.
51
52 Being able to be an AD controller on a stripped-down version of the
53 platform is also a plus, if you need to run in an AD environment. That
54 makes adding redundancy and load distribution cheaper.[2]
55
56 [1] That I know of; if anyone knows of a DHCP client for Linux which
57 handles DDNS updates for IPv4 and IPv6 in the same domain, I'd love to
58 hear about it. ISC's doesn't.
59 [2] Samba 4 can do this too, and I'm looking forward to seeing someone
60 sell Shiva Plugs with Samba 4 preinstalled. And, yeah, Samba 4 has had
61 some big news events this year.
62
63 >> >> Not that they won't be able to bolt one in easily enough; CSRSS means
64 >> >> they should be able to provide, e.g. an SSH daemon, give the
65 >> >> connecting user a PowerShell login session[1], and give it equal
66 >> >> privileges and security controls as they have for any other login
67 >> >> session.
68 >> >
69 >> > How many years have they had? I'd given up on this years ago.
70 >>
71 >> SFU is available in the "Server Core" configuration. I imagine you
72 >> could run OpenSSH under there. Or some commercial entity could come
73 >> along and provide an SSH+screen(ish) component to snap into the CSRSS
74 >> framework.
75 >
76 >
77 > I'd actually forgotten about that, I would never trust their implement
78 > though.
79 > Apparently there's a binary available of OpenSSH that runs on SFU (so says
80 > wiki [1]).
81 > I've been out of the Windows Server environment for a few years now, so I
82 > guess
83 > I've missed out on some of the progress MS has made in this area. It's good
84 > they
85 > are pushing the CLI now. Perhaps in a few releases they'll implement their
86 > own
87 > of encrypting telnet sessions with a screen/tmux lookalike. Microsoft never
88 > ceases to amaze me - with the good and the bad.
89
90 Where security concerns are relevant, I'd favor the implementation
91 which comes with security updates pushed through the platform vendor's
92 channel. With Debian, that means I avoid building my own packages. On
93 Gentoo, that means I keep up with Portage. On Windows, that means
94 using things which come through Microsoft Update. (Anything which
95 doesn't, I could probably replace with something running on a Linux
96 box. Again, this is a server context we're talking about.)
97
98 Also, did you know Windows domain environments support dynamic
99 application of IPSec-based security policies to enforce host patching
100 policies? Some awesome stuff. Got me wanting to learn enough to be
101 able to do the same thing using, e.g. Chef.[3]
102
103
104 [3] http://www.opscode.com/chef/
105
106 [snip]
107
108 --
109 :wq