Steve Barnhart <stb52988@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Well Ok I'd like to some people for their actual dissection of what > the problems were. I guess I don't work in production environments > (not that Fedora is even for that??) and didn't realize so many users > hatrid of YaST. I've always found it pretty simple to use but maybe > that's just me. At least reasoning was given..hopefully the team can > atleast add some more system-config-* programs or something. The underlying problem is that to /really/ be able to configure stuff you have to understand the syntax and semantics of dozens of different configuration files. And AI has still a long way to go to understand even simple ones. Configuration files change format (if ever so slightly), the configuration system has to keep pace (rigurously). And then there is the neverending problem of having to handle systems that (for whatever reason) don't have all pieces up to date. I.e., mix new and old configurations. Or they just tweak a few things on the theory that the rest stays the same. But people /do/ read the original manuals, and google around for fixes to their problems, most times finding solutions (or full configurations) for other systems. And then your configurator is left out in the cold. The "solution" of just synthetizing the configuration anew is less than optimal, obviously. Linux/Unix newbies love YaST and such; seasoned admins hate their guts. If they are managing a mix of machines, even more: They (sort of) impose their own system on all to keep halfways sane, and the automated configurator just can't keep up. -- Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513 -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
