Thread: [Devil-Linux-discuss] In the news ...

SourceForge Headquarters 1320 Columbia Street Suite 310 San Diego, CA 92101 +1 (858) 422-6466

Just noticed this article about DL:

http://www.linux.com/feature/147977

  - BS

Bruce Smith wrote:
> Just noticed this article about DL:
> 
> http://www.linux.com/feature/147977

Nice.  I don't share his obsession with the gui though.  Might also be 
an idea to raise the profile of the policy that DL provides apps as 
obtained from the authors and doesn't provide default configs.

Dick

Quoting "Bruce Smith" <bw...@re...>:

> Just noticed this article about DL:
>
> http://www.linux.com/feature/147977

Seems like his only major complain is the lack of a GUI.
Maybe we need to revisit Webmin for DL, but the initial implementation  
may take quite some time.

-- 

Regards
   Heiko Zuerker
   http://www.devil-linux.org

----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

>> http://www.linux.com/feature/147977
>
> Seems like his only major complain is the lack of a GUI.

I agree a GUI would be a BIG improvement.  Right now we're limited to
Linux gurus to do anything beyond a basic firewall.  A GUI would open
DL to many more potential users.

One other thing we need is automatic hardware detection, especially
for network cards.

> Maybe we need to revisit Webmin for DL, but the initial implementation
> may take quite some time.

I've never used Webmin, but that might be a good option.

Does Webmin require Apache?  Or will it run with smaller web servers?
A requirement of Apache would increase the memory requirements.

What other options are there, besides Webmin?

  - BS

Quoting "Bruce Smith" <bw...@re...>:

>>> http://www.linux.com/feature/147977
>>
>> Seems like his only major complain is the lack of a GUI.
>
> I agree a GUI would be a BIG improvement.  Right now we're limited to
> Linux gurus to do anything beyond a basic firewall.  A GUI would open
> DL to many more potential users.
>
> One other thing we need is automatic hardware detection, especially
> for network cards.
>
>> Maybe we need to revisit Webmin for DL, but the initial implementation
>> may take quite some time.
>
> I've never used Webmin, but that might be a good option.
>
> Does Webmin require Apache?  Or will it run with smaller web servers?
> A requirement of Apache would increase the memory requirements.

Webmin is written in Perl and actually brings it's own http(s) server with it.

> What other options are there, besides Webmin?

Not sure, I'd guess webmin has the most features.

-- 

Regards
   Heiko Zuerker
   http://www.devil-linux.org

----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

Hi,

I must say that for me not having to deal with gui and so on is one of the
main features of Devil-Linux.

That's kind of what "It is created from IT Administators for IT
Administrators." means to me. 

And the articles "However, Devil-Linux is designed to be lightweight, so
don't expect a graphical interface or support for X Window System." is a
selling point for me.

The operating system is made for administrators with all the freedom real
knowledge about how to administer a Linuxsytem gives. And the speed of not
being cluttered with unessential stuff. 

Guibased systems usually means that as soon as you do something specialized
all other configuration breaks, or is resets over and over - just my
experience.

I had not chosen DL if it was not so stripped from "unessential stuff".

And do not see any benefit in having a guibased system such as webmin, if I
need easy macros I make them myself, and if I want users to control stuff I
create the gui for them just allowing the limited changes needed.

Mostly I do not even use setup :)

That said I guess that I can chose not to run webmin, or even not activate
it during creation off a DL media. I just do not see the benefit, there are
already very popular guibased Linux firewalls and you will have to add allot
of features to compete with them, and I'm afraid limitations for us that
like to dig into the system our self.

Kind regards
Jacob

-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
Från: Heiko Zuerker [mailto:he...@zu...] 
Skickat: den 5 oktober 2008 15:59
Till: dev...@li...
Ämne: Re: [Devil-Linux-discuss] In the news ...

Quoting "Bruce Smith" <bw...@re...>:

>>> http://www.linux.com/feature/147977
>>
>> Seems like his only major complain is the lack of a GUI.
>
> I agree a GUI would be a BIG improvement.  Right now we're limited to
> Linux gurus to do anything beyond a basic firewall.  A GUI would open
> DL to many more potential users.
>
> One other thing we need is automatic hardware detection, especially
> for network cards.
>
>> Maybe we need to revisit Webmin for DL, but the initial implementation
>> may take quite some time.
>
> I've never used Webmin, but that might be a good option.
>
> Does Webmin require Apache?  Or will it run with smaller web servers?
> A requirement of Apache would increase the memory requirements.

Webmin is written in Perl and actually brings it's own http(s) server with
it.

> What other options are there, besides Webmin?

Not sure, I'd guess webmin has the most features.

-- 

Regards
   Heiko Zuerker
   http://www.devil-linux.org

----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great
prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Devil-linux-discuss mailing list
Dev...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/devil-linux-discuss

Hello,

Bruce Smith wrote:
>>> http://www.linux.com/feature/147977
>> Seems like his only major complain is the lack of a GUI.

> One other thing we need is automatic hardware detection, especially
> for network cards.
We already have it in 1.3 as a side effect of using udev. If you check the list
of loaded modules just after login prompt appears you will see that not only
pata/sata/scsi and network modules but hardware sensors (lm_sensors and
watchdogs) are loaded... I think we can add a comment to setup (or interface
examples) that module defining is optional now.

>> Maybe we need to revisit Webmin for DL, but the initial implementation
>> may take quite some time.
> 
> I've never used Webmin, but that might be a good option.
Neither have I. Probably it will be easy to begin using DL, but developers and
community surely will be faced with questions and requests like "I can't do it
using webmain, please add the functionality...". IMHO we should push DL users to
learn and use CLI instead of webmin/whatever...

--
Serge

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Serge Leschinsky [mailto:fi...@in...] 
> Sent: zondag 5 oktober 2008 19:47
> To: dev...@li...
> Subject: Re: [Devil-Linux-discuss] In the news ...
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Bruce Smith wrote:
> >>> http://www.linux.com/feature/147977
> >> Seems like his only major complain is the lack of a GUI.
> 
> > One other thing we need is automatic hardware detection, especially 
> > for network cards.
> We already have it in 1.3 as a side effect of using udev. If 
> you check the list of loaded modules just after login prompt 
> appears you will see that not only pata/sata/scsi and network 
> modules but hardware sensors (lm_sensors and
> watchdogs) are loaded... I think we can add a comment to 
> setup (or interface
> examples) that module defining is optional now.

This is not working 100%.... For a intel card eepro100 and e100 is
loaded.. I am looking for a way to disable the eepro100 (In the past bad
experience fo I prefeer e100).

But please keep devil-linux small and stable. The current 1.3 branch
still needs some cleaning. Devil-linux started as a firewall os. At the
moment is getting bigger with non firewall releated stuff.

I wood like to have compact flash version so no readonly root fs. For
example install-to-compactflash: Create a booting ext3 file system with
the file tree (no loop mounting iso image).

-- Peter

Peter Jannesen wrote:
> This is not working 100%.... For a intel card eepro100 and e100 is
> loaded.. I am looking for a way to disable the eepro100 (In the past bad
> experience fo I prefeer e100).

You do this by blacklisting the driver in modprobe.d/

Create a file in that dir with a line:

blacklist e100

and it will be ignored at load time.

Check modutils man page.

Dick