On standard interfaces
One of the things that is usually cited in favour of Macs (and Windows)is that the core of the GUI interface is more or less standardized,unlike many Unix programs. For example, consider the huge disagreementamong xterm , GNU Emacs, and Firefox about how simple copy and pasteworks; surely the Mac or Windows way is better than that.
I don't think so.
My view is that it is easily possible to overdo an adherence tostandardized interfaces, because standardized interfaces only reallymatter if you
「青文臨時小組」成立及藝術品/藏書拍賣籌款活動預告聚會
五月二日,香港淪陷
Why people don't automate sysadmin stuff
Yesterday's entry raises an obviousquestion: why don't people automate things ahead of time, before theyhave so many systems that they have to automate or die?
The simple answer is that it is easier for them not to automate thanit is for them to automate. But why is it that way?
There are at least two reasons:
- there is pretty much no standard way to automate things at thevarious levels, especially across different Unixes and platforms.This means that you have to build an automation
Passion
只差一點那就是我
https://appledaily.atnext.com/template/apple/art_main.cfm?iss_id=20080502&sec_id=4104&subsec_id=11867&art_id=11058726
那地點,亦是我從前回家的
Automation changes as systems grow
Over the time I've worked in system administration, I've observed acommon pattern that I will summarize this way:
As your system count grows, you wind up automating the automation.
Here is the levels that I've seen people (myself included) go through:
- managing systems by hand, one by one.
- using tools that let you run a command on all of your systems orclasses of your systems.
- automating things for clusters, so that you don't have to explicitlyrun commands on