Ubuntu Server graphical interface?

[MJang]

On Sat, 2008-05-03 at 08:52 +0100, Paul Elliott wrote:
> Ante Karamatic wrote:
> > On Fri, 2 May 2008 14:23:31 -0500
> > "Dustin Kirkland" <kirkland at canonical.com> wrote:
> > What's the purpose of fluxbox, openbox, xfce, enlightenment (etc...) on
> > server? It's not like you have some point and click application for
> > setting up apache virtual website or psotfix transport tables.
> 
> We find increasingly a large number of applications are *requiring* a 
> full X environment to run the setup procedure. It's not something I 
> agree with, 

In many cases, I find that X over SSH works for that purpose (with the X
server and GUI on some remote client). In addition, fewer packages are
required on the server to run an X client over SSH - than even a minimal
GUI on the server - much less a full version of GNOME, KDE, or Xfce. And
as Paul suggests, a smaller footprint means a smaller attack vector.

However, if an admin chooses to run a full GUI on Ubuntu Server, I'd
think he/she would want a - supported - system. While I like
alternatives like Fluxbox or even Fvwm, I don't think they're in the
main repository. I suspect at least a substantial minority of Ubuntu
Server users have some Canonical support subscription.

> I strongly believe a CLI installer should always be present 
> for any software that might end up on a server. Unfortunately it's also 
> something outside of our control.

Yup, Red Hat has moved away from CLI installers too. 

Thanks,
Mike