Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!att!ucbvax!ucsfcgl!clausius.mmwb.ucsf.edu!rodgers From: rodgers@clausius.mmwb.ucsf.edu Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc Subject: Re: Norton Go Home! We don't want you! Message-ID: Date: 16 Feb 91 23:23:32 GMT References: <1991Feb6.085431.6076@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au> <430@bria> <433@bria> <455@bria> Sender: daemon@cgl.ucsf.edu Distribution: na Lines: 57 In <455@bria> mike@bria writes: >In an article, ra.MsState.Edu!it1 (Tim Tsai) writes: >|In article <433@bria>: >||In an article, ms.uky.edu!kherron (Kenneth Herron) writes: >||In my "not-quite-so-humble" opinion, armchair sysadmins deserve DOS. >||You are talking about two things here: system administration and end-use. >||In the DOS world, "end-user" and "administrator" are one in the same. >||Not so in the UNIX world. >| >| It is very often the case in the 386/Unix world.. With prices of >| workstations dropping, more end users will have their own Unix box on >| their desk. >And most of these workstations with be networked, and have a central >authority. Good points, both of you. There is a need to address the issue of stand-alone UNIX cpus. Even in the case of networked systems, the tools for efficient administration are lacking. >... My point was that too many UNIX >"professionals" are not learning the _innards_ of the operating system. >They are using scripts and such (that were designed to make routine jobs >a bit easier) as a _crutch_. And yes, a sysadmin that relies on 'vi' and >has no idea how to use 'ed' is NOT worth a dime. Know why? Sometime, he's >gonna run into a situation where his /usr filesystem got hosed, or the >/etc/termcap got chunked. If something like that stops a sysadmin, then >yep, he's worthless as a plug nickel. You could argue that a good sysadmin also plans ahead, and stores a few essential utilities (including the editor he is most comfortable with, perhaps vi) on an archive medium to be pulled in under mini-UNIX in the event of a major crisis such as the one you describe, or even stores multiple copies of key programs in small administrative directories on different partitions. We do the former. Being a good sysadmin involves much more than conversancy with any given tool or tools. An intimate knowledge of internals without goof general strategic reasoning skills is not of much use.. >It depends. Since Norton attaches itself, virus-like, to my kernel, and >induces the kernel to lie to me about the true state of affairs on the >system, I would count this as a hinderance. I can't speak to Norton, but I share your distrust of a firm known for its involvment in the DOS world trying to use this reputation to barge into the UNIX community. However, there is a crying need for good administrative tools, and this is being addressed by others. Witness the ERSA system from Canada, or the System Manager's Toolkit from the University of California (otl@violet.berkeley.edu for information). Both attempt to address administrative needs starting from the UNIX end of things... Cheerio, Rick Rodgers R. P. C. Rodgers, M.D. (415)476-2957 (work) 664-0560 (home) UCSF Laurel Heights Campus UUCP: ...ucbvax.berkeley.edu!cca.ucsf.edu!rodgers 3333 California St., Suite 102 Internet: rodgers@maxwell.mmwb.ucsf.edu San Francisco CA 94118 USA BITNET: rodgers@ucsfcca