> Then the registry breaks in the same way. There is always something
>that someone can do to screw the machine up; moving where most of the
>data is stored doesn't change that. At most it reduces the number of
>knobs someone can break off.
Not true. First I would like to say the a directory service isn't a
registry. It's a database to store information in a organized system. There
is nothing organized about the windows registry! The window registry is
nothing more than a huge INI file with bits and pieces of information
everywhere. It has no schema to pervent anyone from adding an bits of
information anywhere they want.
With a text file I can put anything in it. I can make a 100 MB resolv.conf
file if I wanted too. With a structured schema, the configuration can pretty
much be locked down what information is summitted or changed.
> No one dealing with a large collective of Unix machines is managing
>them on a one-by-one basis. They are driving configurations out of a
>central system for managing them, in some form or way, and if they have
>any sense individualization is strongly discouraged if not exterminated.
>(There are some quite elaborate systems for doing this, going so far as
>to store everything in SQL databases. See various LISA proceedings.)
Do you see DS as a bad thing for Linux? Tell why you think having a DS
system for Linux would be a terrible waste?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/