Server comments

[brentoboy]

the idea that an x server takes up too many resources is completely
unfounded. Take Damn Small Linux for example.  I can run it with a
fluxbox with 100s of apps on my little sister's 486 with 16 mb ram, and
it is lightning fast.

A well designed Fluxbox, blackbox, or openbox GUI is worth a thousand
words, especially if the menu that pops up when you click the desktop
has server oriented stuff... like...

add remove server(s) like the package manager for ubuntu does today
with
samba, apache2, php, mysql, postgresql, vnc, ltsp, cups, dhcp, FTP,
ssh, cvs, nfs, pop, smtp, ....  complete with GUI configuration
utilities.

I agree that there is a place for a barebones, no gui, no apps
installation, but a "server" is a "server" and if all that stuff came
preinstalled, and we got to choose to remove (or deactivate) the ones
we dont want, that would be wonderful.  --- crazy wonderful.  "Just
Works" server.  using the Server install to install a barebones
installation is misleading, and will make a lot of potential small
office servers choose something else.  Let the current server be called
"base" and let the server install give you something that is useful out
of the box.  And, then, remove the services that you dont want running.

the popup menu would have entries like...

Samba
---start
---stop
---restart
---configure
---smb user manager
---edit config file

It would have a similar menu for each server installed.
-------------------

That would go a heck of a long way to making ubuntu servers the best
choice in the world (there really isnt that much competition in the
world today for a basic server that just works)

there's my 2 cents


-- 
brentoboy