[olug] to X or not to X (on a server)?

[Eric Penne]

I can't stand menuconfig or just config.  Make xconfig is much less
confusing and easier to navigate for me.  Compiling a kernel on a machine
without is not for me.  I compile the kernel on a machine with X then
transfer it over.  I avoid menuconfig at all costs.

Eric

> try "make menuconfig" sometime (if you haven')... I find it much faster
> and easier.
>
> On Mon, 12 May 2003 07:35:52 -0500
> David Walker <linux_user at grax.com> wrote:
>
> |Since I don't like recompiling a kernel without "make xconfig",
> |I like to put just enough X on the server to redirect a display to
> |another machine, either through ssh or just setting
> |"DISPLAY=192.168.217.4:0"
> |
> |On Monday 12 May 2003 01:49 am, Brian Wiese wrote:
> |> On Fri, 9 May 2003 05:15:41 -0500
> |>
> |> Kenton Brede <xyf at nixnotes.org> wrote:
> |> |On Fri, May 09, 2003 at 06:05:37AM -0500, Brian Wiese wrote:
> |> |> So, my friend and I where having this little discussion about |>
> |> setting up a debian stable server for basically samba file and print
> |> |> serving. He says X should not ever be installed and I say it
> should. |> |>  What do the fellow gnu/linux admins on the list recommend
> from |> |>  experience... which has more benefit, to install X on a
> server or |> |>  to not?  hard drive space is not a concern.
> |> |>
> |> |> reasons for X:
> |> |> - provides productive usable environment for local system
> |> |> administration(I like to have a couple of terminal windows open
> and |> |> other GUI tools at hand (a webbrowser perhaps) when
> administrating a |> |> system versus straight CLI)- will not be
> used/running normally, |> |> standard runlevel = 2- could easily be
> uninstalled with 'apt-get |> |> remove--purge xserver-common...'-
> security updates go along with |> |> 'apt-get upgrade' so not much of a
> concern (and there are no remote |> |> shell logins, just IT staff)
> |> |>
> |> |> reasons against X:
> |> |> - another piece of software installed that could be a security |>
> |> vulnerability- added difficulty for system backups?
> |> |> - performance benefit by not being installed?
> |> |>
> |> |> so, to have the option of X or to not on a server, what's best? |>
> |
> |> |I can't say absolutely X should never be installed on a server but I
> |> |haven't seen a reason to do so yet.  A few reasons why I wouldn't:
> |> |
> |> |* Possible security vulnerability that must be dealt with.
> |> |
> |> |* Don't have to track and install security updates for X and all the
> |> |  stuff installed with it.
> |> |
> |> |* During your career you will more than likely find yourself in an
> |> |  environment mostly without a graphical interface.  Relying on X |>
> |  doesn't prepare you for that.
> |> |
> |> |* Most of the crashes / freezes I have personally seen on linux |>
> |systems  have happened while running X.
> |> |
> |> |* Running a graphical browser on a server isn't a good idea due to
> |> |  the inevitable runaway processes that occur while surfing.
> |> |
> |> |kent
> |>
> |> Yeah, this is kind of the same mentality I've had all along.  My own
> |> webserver has been up for more than 2 separate ocassions of 210+ days
> |> of uptime over the past 1 1/2 years (recently had to replace UPS for
> |> last downtime)... and since it's all remotely managed/old slow
> system, |> I've never installed X on it, just ssh.  If I have a local
> server |> though, and therefore almost always hooked into a kvm
> somewhere, I go |> ahead and install X though and just run it when I
> need it.  I
> |> personally find that the functionality benefit of admin' a box from
> an |> X environment far outways any other valid/potential concerns. (to
> copy |> and paste, have multiple xterms/konsoles/... of an extremely
> |> large/custom screen size and run a browser on localhost for testing
> |> etc, it's what graphic environments are for - do interact with the |>
> system more usefully...)  It's another one of those personal admin |>
> choices I assume, but it is nice to not 'have to' run it all the time |>
> (like in Windoze) and have the option to unistall it or turn it off at
> |> will without loosing major functionality on the system.
> |>
> |> peace
> |>
> |>   Brian Wiese | bwiese at cotse.com | aim: unolinuxguru
> |> ------------------------------------------------------
> |>   GnuPG/PGP key 0x6BFF6681 | "FREEDOM!" - Braveheart
> |> ------------------------------------------------------
> |> This is not about Napster or DVDs. It's about your Freedom.
> |>   I'll see your DMCA and raise you a First Amendment.
> |>               http://www.anti-dmca.org
> |> _______________________________________________
> |> OLUG mailing list
> |> OLUG at olug.org
> |> http://lists.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug
> |
> |_______________________________________________
> |OLUG mailing list
> |OLUG at olug.org
> |http://lists.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug
> |
>
>
>   Brian Wiese | bwiese at cotse.com | aim: unolinuxguru
> ------------------------------------------------------
>   GnuPG/PGP key 0x6BFF6681 | "FREEDOM!" - Braveheart
> ------------------------------------------------------
> This is not about Napster or DVDs. It's about your Freedom.
>   I'll see your DMCA and raise you a First Amendment.
>               http://www.anti-dmca.org
> _______________________________________________
> OLUG mailing list
> OLUG at olug.org
> http://lists.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug