On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 12:31:19PM -0500, David Zeuthen wrote: > On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 12:09 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > > I'm just not convinced that not being able to ssh in to a server and edit > > some config files but rather have to figure out how to tweak the > > policy-daemon-of-the-month is the user experience a large segment of "we" > > wants at all. Human-editable config files are a huge strength. Using a > > policy daemon may be part of the answer, but it should be able to get its > > configuration from something that can be fixed with vi. > > No-one says you can't have command line tools to set g-p-m preferences > and that you can't use them while logging in via ssh. He did not say "command line tools", he said "vi". That's a hell of a difference. Text file processing comes with a nice set of tools for diffing, patching, synchronizing, etc. Gconf doesn't. Xml is piss-poor to run sed or grep on. > Heck, since > gconftool-2 already exists you can do this already; just write a small > shell script, gpm-set-governor or whatever, and it'll already work. I > can't speak for Richard but if we do this thing of making g-p-m run in > the unusual cases when no-one is logged in, I'm pretty damn sure he > would take patches providing such functionality. You or others would > probably have to do the work however. In the 200 or so fedora installations I have around, around 30 see someone logged on. Remote administration capabilities and network transparency are some of the points that allowed Unix is survive against Windows. Please do stop thinking that the "openoffice gnome desktop" user is the only worthwhile one. Especially since he often isn't the one doing the linux installation in the first place. OG. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
