On 23/10/09 10:33, Ryan Dwyer wrote:
> So then that brings up the question of what web based tool should be used.
Ubuntu Server has chosen eBox as that tool.
--
Onno Benschop
Connected via Bigpond NextG at S31°54'06" - E115°50'39" (Yokine, WA)
--
()/)/)()..ASCII for Onno..
|>>?
>
>
> BTW: GUI tools shouldn't run on a server, but on the admin's (or
> pseudo-admin's) desktop. Using a secure connection to the server, of
> course.
>
>
I take it no one has any issues with web based GUI tools? The server could
run a CLI and after installing, prompt the user to open a browser t
Op vrijdag 23-10-2009 om 10:32 uur [tijdzone +1030], schreef Ryan Dwyer:
> I don't think there's any use discussing whether we think a GUI or CLI
> is better. Shouldn't we focus on what the typical business wants and
> what they're prepared to use?
Businesses don't want a GUI per se, they want so
Ryan Dwyer wrote:
> I don't think there's any use discussing whether we think a GUI or CLI
> is better. Shouldn't we focus on what the typical business wants and
> what they're prepared to use?
You started it. :-D. BTW, please do not top post.
>
> Although it seems that the first topic to discu
I don't think there's any use discussing whether we think a GUI or CLI is
better. Shouldn't we focus on what the typical business wants and what
they're prepared to use?
Although it seems that the first topic to discuss is how the uid/gid system
can be changed or mapped to support local and domain
On 23/10/09 07:04, Chris Jones wrote:
> But we shouldn't be encouraging the use of a GUI inside a server
> environment simply because it breeds dumb users.
>
While I agree that users, well "sysadmins" (and I use the term loosely)
are getting dumber in the world, I don't think it's because of a G
Whether I'm becoming old fashioned or whether I've been using Linux for
too long, I dunno. But 90% of the applications that I use are command
line driven. The only graphical apps I use on a daily basis are Firefox,
Evolution. And of course the occasional use of The Gimp, Inkscape,
Brasero, Devede e
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 1:50 PM, Tim Gelvin wrote:
> When can we expect to see an update to OpenOffice?
>
Depends on which version of Ubuntu you're talking about.
Jaunty (9.04) is already released, so the version is unlikely to change
unless a security vulnerability is found. Guidelines at [1].
On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 13:50 -0400, Tim Gelvin wrote:
> When can we expect to see an update to OpenOffice?
What do you mean? There is 1:3.1.1-5ubuntu1 in Karmic already.
Chris
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://
This is largely a problem that exists not only with Ubuntu, but with the
Open Source Movement in general.
Last time this conversation came up, there was a large contingent of people
we wished to see a core group of a marketing team come to fruition.
Unfortunately, several of the more active member
When can we expect to see an update to OpenOffice?
Tim
www.timscomputershop.com
CompTIA A+ Authorized Service Center
1-888-286-9284
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
This issue is a good candidate for the (underused) Community Bug
Reporting area in Launchpad.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-community/+filebug
Can someone summarize and log it there?
Cheers,
Randall
Ubuntu Vancouver LoCo
> --
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009
There's a bunch of open source clones of Microsoft Entertainment Pack
games. I'd be sufficiently ammused by actually including them all in
Ubuntu... and maybe an Entertainment Pack option. Ubuntu would
probably better serve its users including other things, though, rather
than just an attempted c
Steven Susbauer wrote:
>
> On Oct 22, 2009, at 2:56 AM, Christopher Chan wrote:
>
>> Steven Susbauer wrote:
>>>
>>> On Oct 21, 2009, at 10:56 PM, Christopher Chan wrote:
>>>
Ryan Dwyer wrote:
>
> It doesn't matter how much work is involved. Do you think the
> Linux/Ubuntu community
Markus Hitter wrote:
>
> Am 22.10.2009 um 10:02 schrieb Christopher Chan:
>
>> Mapping system? I guess that means no shared filesystems.
>
> SMBFS, sshfs and to some extent NFS support mapping already. It works
> just fine here and today, mapping volumes of a Mac OS X server onto an
> Ubuntu box.
On Oct 22, 2009, at 2:56 AM, Christopher Chan wrote:
> Steven Susbauer wrote:
>>
>> On Oct 21, 2009, at 10:56 PM, Christopher Chan wrote:
>>
>>> Ryan Dwyer wrote:
It doesn't matter how much work is involved. Do you think the
Linux/Ubuntu community would be willing to change the way
Am 22.10.2009 um 10:02 schrieb Christopher Chan:
> Mapping system? I guess that means no shared filesystems.
SMBFS, sshfs and to some extent NFS support mapping already. It works
just fine here and today, mapping volumes of a Mac OS X server onto
an Ubuntu box.
Markus
- - - - - - - - - -
Paul Smith wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 11:56 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote:
>
>>> It doesn't matter how much work is involved. Do you think the
>>> Linux/Ubuntu community would be willing to change the way system
>>> logons work if it meant bug #1 could be completed?
>>>
>> Let us se
Steven Susbauer wrote:
>
> On Oct 21, 2009, at 10:56 PM, Christopher Chan wrote:
>
>> Ryan Dwyer wrote:
>>>
>>> It doesn't matter how much work is involved. Do you think the
>>> Linux/Ubuntu community would be willing to change the way system
>>> logons work if it meant bug #1 could be completed?
>
19 matches
Mail list logo
