Re: On Compatibility

[Bas Wijnen]

On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 02:57:18PM -0400, Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-10-25 at 20:17 +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > interestingly, you are talking about desktop systems only.
> > 
> > However, one important class of applications are servers.  And servers
> > usually are multi-user oriented.  This is not necessarily so, but many
> > are.
> > 
> > There is a huge legacy of administration manuals how to set up such
> > systems, in a "reasonably secure manner".  For example, how to set up
> > web servers and virtual domains.
> > 
> > This is an important legacy...
> 
> Actually, I do not agree. In contrast to user applications, the total
> set of important server applications is very very small. It is not at
> all out of the question that these could be rewritten, and in many cases
> the rewrite could be done by restructuring existing systems.

I think Marcus meant the legacy of educated sysadmins and manuals, not the
servers themselves.  Rewriting the server may be pretty easy, reeducating all
the people who know how it worked isn't.

I'm not really sure what my opinion about this is, I just wanted to notify the
appearant misunderstanding.

Thanks,
Bas

-- 
I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org).
If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader.
Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text
   in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word.
Please do not use the MS Word format for attachments either.
For more information, see http://129.125.47.90/e-mail.html

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature