3 ms·

The windows equivalent to make such a change would be some kind of hidden module for that scm. Exe or whatever that obscure config tool is called.

by herbst 9y ago

pjmlp 9y ago
It would still be an easier to navigate GUI tool, possibly with tooltips and online help along the way, than manually editing /etc or /usr/share files.
- vetinari 9y ago
  In practice, it is still easier to grep and edit config files in /etc (often commented), than to look for the needle in a haystack like gpedit, where, if localized, you don't even know exact term you are looking for.
  - kire456 9y ago
    Not really a fair comparison. For editing config files I often have to go to man pages to find out what the syntax is for the things I want (and sometimes, where to find the file). Especially if editing bash/zsh.rc, there is no hope of getting anything done without Google unless you already know how to do it. Conversely, most group policies I have ever needed were pointed out, including where to find them, after one web search, and their use is extensively documented in the config editor.
    - vetinari 9y ago
      > here is no hope of getting anything done without Google > were pointed out, including where to find them, after one web search, Well, if you are doing that one web search, it doesn't matter whether the named key is for gui or text config. Except for that localization issue, if you find English string, it won't help you with localized one. Then there is the issue of the GP items themselves: many times you don't know whether to choose enable or disable, because double negatives FTW.
  - proactivesvcs 9y ago
    If you want a needle in a haystack, try finding out how to adjust network provider, binding and connection orders in the Windows GUI.
- pjc50 9y ago
  People say things like this, but if you're not familiar with it the Windows networking GUI configuration is still quite a mess. Especially since Win8 there are now two different GUIs for it, with different feature sets. There are still some configuration items that have to be set in the registry or through Powershell (wmi and so on). The registry is much worse than editing files in /etc/ because you can't back it up, revision control it, or put comments in. Random googling reveals people having surprisingly similar problems with the Windows DHCP server: https://community.spiceworks.com/topic/332253-cannot-backup-restore-dhcp-on-new-server-2008-r2-dc-from-2008-std https://community.spiceworks.com/topic/332253-cannot-backup-...
  - pjmlp 9y ago
    I am familiar with Windows since version 3.0 and was introduced to UNIX via Xenix. As for GNU/Linux, I know it since Slackware 2.0.
    - pjc50 9y ago
      I thought you'd be familiar with it; I was talking about third parties who might not be familiar with either.
      - pjmlp 9y ago
        If they aren't familiar with either, the amount of documentation in Technet and wizards help, is much better than searching man pages. Leaving aside the fact that the variation among Windows versions is quite small versus the GNU/Linux distribution fragmentation.
pilif 9y ago
In this specific case, the DHCP server configuration under Windows makes it abundantly clear though that you need to make your DHCP server authoritative by adding a warning icon and presenting a warning dialog when it's not running in authoritative mode. Making it authoritative is then to just press a button in that dialog. Yes. You have to know that you have to open the GUI for DHCP server configuration in order to configure the DHCP server, but that's really all you need to know to prevent the issue described here. isc-dhcpd that's often used under linux doesn't even warn to syslog when it's not authoritative. All indication for doing so is given in the sample config file using # network, the authoritative directive should be uncommented. #authoritative; It doesn't however explain to you why you should or shouldn't do that and, again, it starts up just fine without this uncommented. Case in point: Back when I was learning about all of this my Windows-based DHCP servers were all authoritative, whereas none of my Linux or FreeBSD based DHCP servers were.
- ntnn 9y ago
  From when and which distro is that default config file? I remember having a text next to it saying 'Enable this, if this is the only DHCP server on this network' or something along the lines of that with a pointer to the documentation for an explanation.
  - tolien 9y ago
    The current isc-dhcp-server package in Debian testing has that comment, although there’s a line missing… # If this DHCP server is the official DHCP server for the local # network, the authoritative directive should be uncommented. From that, it’s a little more clear that you should be uncommenting that option.
- dspillett 9y ago
  > the DHCP server configuration under Windows Though for the opening to the current discussion that is a moot point - this is not relevant to either OS on the desktop.
  - 9y ago
hungerstrike 9y ago
Incorrect. Windows has a dedicated configuration tool for DHCP.

The windows equivalent to make such a change would be some kind of hidden module for that scm. Exe or whatever that obscure config tool is called.

by herbst 9y ago

The windows equivalent to make such a change would be some kind of hidden module for that scm. Exe or whatever that obscure config tool is called.

pjmlp 9y ago

It would still be an easier to navigate GUI tool, possibly with tooltips and online help along the way, than manually editing /etc or /usr/share files.

vetinari 9y ago
In practice, it is still easier to grep and edit config files in /etc (often commented), than to look for the needle in a haystack like gpedit, where, if localized, you don't even know exact term you are looking for.
- kire456 9y ago
  Not really a fair comparison. For editing config files I often have to go to man pages to find out what the syntax is for the things I want (and sometimes, where to find the file). Especially if editing bash/zsh.rc, there is no hope of getting anything done without Google unless you already know how to do it. Conversely, most group policies I have ever needed were pointed out, including where to find them, after one web search, and their use is extensively documented in the config editor.
  - vetinari 9y ago
    > here is no hope of getting anything done without Google > were pointed out, including where to find them, after one web search, Well, if you are doing that one web search, it doesn't matter whether the named key is for gui or text config. Except for that localization issue, if you find English string, it won't help you with localized one. Then there is the issue of the GP items themselves: many times you don't know whether to choose enable or disable, because double negatives FTW.
- proactivesvcs 9y ago
  If you want a needle in a haystack, try finding out how to adjust network provider, binding and connection orders in the Windows GUI.
pjc50 9y ago
People say things like this, but if you're not familiar with it the Windows networking GUI configuration is still quite a mess. Especially since Win8 there are now two different GUIs for it, with different feature sets. There are still some configuration items that have to be set in the registry or through Powershell (wmi and so on). The registry is much worse than editing files in /etc/ because you can't back it up, revision control it, or put comments in. Random googling reveals people having surprisingly similar problems with the Windows DHCP server: https://community.spiceworks.com/topic/332253-cannot-backup-restore-dhcp-on-new-server-2008-r2-dc-from-2008-std https://community.spiceworks.com/topic/332253-cannot-backup-...
- pjmlp 9y ago
  I am familiar with Windows since version 3.0 and was introduced to UNIX via Xenix. As for GNU/Linux, I know it since Slackware 2.0.
  - pjc50 9y ago
    I thought you'd be familiar with it; I was talking about third parties who might not be familiar with either.
    - pjmlp 9y ago
      If they aren't familiar with either, the amount of documentation in Technet and wizards help, is much better than searching man pages. Leaving aside the fact that the variation among Windows versions is quite small versus the GNU/Linux distribution fragmentation.

pilif 9y ago

In this specific case, the DHCP server configuration under Windows makes it abundantly clear though that you need to make your DHCP server authoritative by adding a warning icon and presenting a warning dialog when it's not running in authoritative mode. Making it authoritative is then to just press a button in that dialog. Yes. You have to know that you have to open the GUI for DHCP server configuration in order to configure the DHCP server, but that's really all you need to know to prevent the issue described here. isc-dhcpd that's often used under linux doesn't even warn to syslog when it's not authoritative. All indication for doing so is given in the sample config file using # network, the authoritative directive should be uncommented. #authoritative; It doesn't however explain to you why you should or shouldn't do that and, again, it starts up just fine without this uncommented. Case in point: Back when I was learning about all of this my Windows-based DHCP servers were all authoritative, whereas none of my Linux or FreeBSD based DHCP servers were.

ntnn 9y ago
From when and which distro is that default config file? I remember having a text next to it saying 'Enable this, if this is the only DHCP server on this network' or something along the lines of that with a pointer to the documentation for an explanation.
- tolien 9y ago
  The current isc-dhcp-server package in Debian testing has that comment, although there’s a line missing… # If this DHCP server is the official DHCP server for the local # network, the authoritative directive should be uncommented. From that, it’s a little more clear that you should be uncommenting that option.
dspillett 9y ago
> the DHCP server configuration under Windows Though for the opening to the current discussion that is a moot point - this is not relevant to either OS on the desktop.
- 9y ago

hungerstrike 9y ago

Incorrect. Windows has a dedicated configuration tool for DHCP.