On 2015-01-23, Warren Young <wyml at etr-usa.com> wrote:> On Jan 23, 2015, at 12:35 PM, Valeri Galtsev <galtsev at kicp.uchicago.edu> wrote: > >> I do prefer 3ware web RAID admin >> interface anything else (it more transparently prevents me from making >> fatal blunders - probably just me). > > No, not just you. tw_cli is needlessly confusing in its command structure.Just you wait till you get to the MegaRAID command line! It makes tw_cli seem like echo in comparison. I found the 3ware web interface too clunky for my purposes, so I forced myself to learn tw_cli. Once I used it regularly I found it to be mostly usable. I've yet to do this with megacli or storcli, and those are so much more complicated than tw_cli, so I haven't learned them very well yet. But (getting back a little to the original topic) getting to the 3ware web interface should not require root privileges on the client, since it's just the browser connecting to the 3ware http(s) listener. The OP seemed to be ranting about a prompt for an administrative password from the desktop environment. --keith -- kkeller at wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
On Fri, January 23, 2015 3:32 pm, Keith Keller wrote:> On 2015-01-23, Warren Young <wyml at etr-usa.com> wrote: >> On Jan 23, 2015, at 12:35 PM, Valeri Galtsev <galtsev at kicp.uchicago.edu> >> wrote: >> >>> I do prefer 3ware web RAID admin >>> interface anything else (it more transparently prevents me from making >>> fatal blunders - probably just me). >> >> No, not just you. tw_cli is needlessly confusing in its command >> structure. > > Just you wait till you get to the MegaRAID command line! It makes > tw_cli seem like echo in comparison. > > I found the 3ware web interface too clunky for my purposes, so I forced > myself to learn tw_cli. Once I used it regularly I found it to be > mostly usable. I've yet to do this with megacli or storcli, and those > are so much more complicated than tw_cli, so I haven't learned them very > well yet. > > But (getting back a little to the original topic) getting to the 3ware > web interface should not require root privileges on the client, since > it's just the browser connecting to the 3ware http(s) listener. The OP > seemed to be ranting about a prompt for an administrative password from > the desktop environment. >Yes, this is as bad as it can be. Users in "enterprise" environment shouldn't be asked admin (root) password. And even prompted that these or those things ("updates") are available. Don't they have sysadmin, or he sleeps on his job? No, he is just overworked weeding out all this crap from systems he supports ;-) Valeri ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On Fri, 2015-01-23 at 13:32 -0800, Keith Keller wrote:> <snip>> But (getting back a little to the original topic) getting to the 3ware > web interface should not require root privileges on the client, since > it's just the browser connecting to the 3ware http(s) listener. The OP > seemed to be ranting about a prompt for an administrative password from > the desktop environment.Actually, my rant was much more about it interrupting me, without being asked, to do some updates that I didn't yet request *and* being persistent about it over time in *my* (not Freedesktop.org's) work space. I already get notified of available updates, *without* offensive or persistent intrusion, by the updates available icon on the panel on my Gnome desktop. It was suitable IMO. Before 6.6 broke the runlevel/X multiple session functionality (going from 3 to 5 results in instability when multiple X sessions are to be used), causing crashes (another great result from those who "know better" as they screwed around with "init" and the inittab processing?), I would then log the users off, drop to run level 3, do an rsync backup of home, boot and root, do yum updates (sometimes selectively, as in doing glibc* and kernel stuff first and then re-booting to do the rest) and then return to the normally scheduled programming. I like it that way - it's secure, keeps me aware of what is going on on my machines w/o having to rummage through logs, mail, or worse. As a concession to the now broken runlevel/X multiple session processing, I remain in run level 5 and do the backups etc. Not the way I would prefer. And now since I filed a bug and reported the crash and provided narrative and files and have seen 0 movement on the bug, I wonder why I wasted my time reporting it. If I was missing something I would hope at least a reply requesting more info or whatever would be forthcoming. Maybe Rodney Dangeruser "Don't get no respect"? ;) Well, at least "upstream".> > --keithBill
On 2015-01-23, Bill Maltby (C4B) <centos4bill at gmail.com> wrote:> > Actually, my rant was much more about it interrupting me, without being > asked, to do some updates that I didn't yet request *and* being > persistent about it over time in *my* (not Freedesktop.org's) work > space.Perhaps if you'd specified that in your original post there would have been a lot less confusion about what you were upset about.> And now since I filed a bug and reported the crash and provided > narrative and files and have seen 0 movement on the bug,Exactly where did you report this bug? If it was to RH, and you're not a RH customer, you shouldn't be surprised if they ignored the "bug", since they probably consider it a configuration option, not a bug. --keith -- kkeller at wombat.san-francisco.ca.us