(OT) Re: Unity ROCKS!!!

[Tom H]

On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 12:47 PM, Liam Proven <lproven at gmail.com> wrote:


> For Linux, it's an ssh session or VNC if you're lucky and that's about
> it. There is no standard Linux equivalent to domains or Active
> Directory. No, LDAP is not a replacement, any more than a pair of
> roller skates is a replacement for the Shinkansen bullet train.

Aren't you exaggerating a little? :)

We've got LDAP running for a few thousand Solaris and Linux boxes.
We've had NIS and NIS+ in the past...


> Linux needs more and better ready-to-use server distros, as opposed to
> a DIY toolkit to built your own server from scratch such as Ubuntu
> Server, and then it needs some compelling management tools for running
> a whole network of Linux clients attached to said server in an easy,
> point-and-click fashion.

I agree that LDAP's a pain to set up but I don't run any server with a
GUI so point-n-click wouldn't be of any use to me or to any company
where I'm working or have worked.

Likewise and Centrify offer LDAP solutions but I've never used them so
I neither know whether they're GUI- or CLI-based nor whether they're
ready-to-go out of the box.

Apple has a very good and easy LDAP setup on OS X Server so it should
be possible to create something similar on Linux.


> Active Directory is extremely complex and quite hard to learn - I
> speak from experience as someone who is currently studying it. It
> should not be impossible to come up with something easier and more
> accessible to offer as an alternative to it to manage a company full
> of Linux workstations.

AD's not that difficult! (I speak as a former Win sysadmin who,
thankfully, hasn't had to be even a part-time Win sysadmin since
2003.) It has very extensive options - and probably far more now than
when I admin'd it - but a basic setup is a simple enough endeavour.