[NTLUG:Discuss] DistroWatch 10 Most Popular Linux Distros

[Ted Gould]

On Wed, 2009-03-25 at 17:20 -0500, terry wrote:
> 2009/3/25 Ted Gould <ted at gould.cx>:
> > On Wed, 2009-03-25 at 13:41 -0500, Chris Cox wrote:
> >> It could be a Debian thing... but, for example, the Synaptic
> >> package manager (and I here apt-get does this as well) downloads,
> >> installs and STARTS services (yes... STARTS them without
> >> me making config changes before they are stated).  Oh... I'm
> >> sure it's probably configurable somewhere, but that SHOULD
> >> not be the default for packages.
> >
> > Yes, that would be a Debian packaging thing.  I guess I'm a little
> > confused at your point here.  You want to install packages but not have
> > them run?
> 
> Well, for one thing, he said "service" not "package" and  there is
> something to be said for not running a service until you  have had a
> chance to configure it properly.  For instance,  if you  install an
> ftp server, you'll want to decide who gets to use it and who doesn't
> and what areas the user has access to and what directories and files
> the client user does not have write privileges to etc...  and you will
> want to address these issues before actually turning on the service.
>
> > It would seem that the same case would happen on any
> > distribution that allowed for packages to install and be set to run on
> > startup.  There is no guarantee that you're happy with the settings when
> > you reboot.
> 
> That's just the point, you need to be happy with the settings before
> truing the service on.  On a Ubuntu system, the service is turned on
> as part of the install process, rebooting is not an issue because the
> service is turned on as soon as the install is completed and many of
> us just don't like that.  And yes, one could conceivably just turn it
> off  immediately and leave it off until such time as proper
> configuration issues can be addressed and completed, so it is not all
> that big of a deal, not a deal breaker for me anyway..... [I'm just
> trying to  help make Chris' point]... I don't like it much, but as
> long as I know how it works on a Ubuntu system, [that services are
> automatically turned on as soon as the install is completed] I can
> deal  with it - one just needs to know it and be prepared to do
> something about it right away... if need be.

I understand.  I'm on the fence on this one.  It's kind nice to install
the webserver and then go to http://localhost and see the default Apache
page.  I think that, in general, as long as the default settings are
benign I have a hard time saying that's insecure or otherwise a problem.

For things like DBus or HAL, I would definitely want them running if I
installed them as I have no idea how to start them properly on my own.
I wouldn't want them installed and not running.

> > Sure, shared networks are complex, but there's no reason to pass that
> > complexity on to users.  That's an issue for developers and engineers.
> 
> Now days everyone is on an untrusted network - very few people leave
> their computers disconnected from the internet.

Yes.  Very true, but that doesn't mean that computers need to be
difficult to use.

		--Ted