Re: [cobalt-users] Are all packages model specific ?

["Steve Werby" <steve-lists@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

"Josh Kuperman" <josh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I just want to make sure that in a sense you are validating some of
> the constant griping that the documentation sucks.

Well, as far as that goes my opinion shouldn't count more than anyone
else's.  Between the manual and online knowledge base I think the
functionality controlled via the web interface is well documented.  For
those using the RaQs in the real world as more than a basic server appliance
there's a lot more knowledge that's needed.

> I bought this
> because the machine needs to be manageable when I'm not here. And web
> and email is 80% of the use of any machine sitting on the net. That
> part is fine.
>
> Personally, I was always happy with compiling from tarballs. I have no
> problems with RPMs or even with Source RPMs and rebuilding. I just
> want to determine what's already been done on my machine.

It sounds like you are a more experienced *nix admin than most so it should
be easy for you to tell what software is installed.  If you want to know the
differences between a straight Red Hat server and yours, I'm not aware of
any documentation on the subject.

> It gets
> confounded when I see the RPMs for samba but no package for samba.

Most of the software is installed via RPMs so most will not have an
associated PKG file.

> It
> seems that ipcahins is installed, there is an option for controlling
> bandwidth.

Bandwidth controls are not handled by IPCHAINS.  I don't think IPCHAINS is
pre-installed on the XTR, but someone with an XTR handy can verify.

> If I install squid manually am I going to mess up what's
> there.

I have not installed squid on a RaQ so I can't say.

> If I'm right in taking it as don't worry about the backages just let
> them manage DNS, MAIL, and the WEB, and treat the rest of the machine
> as any RedHat box I still have problems. One of the tricks for Squid
> to make it a rewriting or reverse proxy is to run Squid on port 80 and
> the local server on 127.0.0.1. Doesn't look doable on this box. The
> versions of BIND and SENDMAIL look dangerously old; is that my
> imagination.

Yes, they are not very recent.  But I believe they're patched for all known
exploits.  Have you found otherwise?

> I will search and read through the archives. I get the feeling from 30
> seconds even glancing at the last weeks posts that I'm not the first
> to have a problem with how these boxes are documented.

You are definitely not the first who realized the boxes aren't as easy to
administer in the real world as the marketing material suggests.  I
personally think they're great boxes if used primarily for their intended
function by people with no/little *nix experience.  They can save such
people time and money and allow them to jump into the world of *nix servers.
I hope this email doesn't start another thread on the pros/cons of the
Cobalt line and how Sun should do one thing or another.  It's been beaten to
death and anyone that has concerns or suggestons should probably share them
with Sun directly, not a user list which isn't officially monitored by Sun
employees.  I'm not playing list daddy and this isn't directed to you Josh,
just making a friendly suggestion b/c after 3 years on these lists I can
tell where threads like this are heading.  Please do continue this thread
though if you can help Josh with his questions and concerns.

--
Steve Werby
President, Befriend Internet Services LLC
http://www.befriend.com/