4 ms·
Tried it on ubuntu, it also has weirdness there. The whole tool is definitely rough around the edges. I would never use it to actually change machines though.
by tinco 6y ago
Tried it on ubuntu, it also has weirdness there. The whole tool is definitely rough around the edges.
I would never use it to actually change machines though. Definitely Ansible over SSH is the way to go there.
I've mixed feelings about controlling the machines through cockpit. In theory there shouldn't be any difference between SSH and HTTPS on the security of the protocol side, but it definitely feels iffy to have a python (I think?) web app execute administration commands on a server.
I wonder what the security professionals think of it.
- chousuke 6y agoI have to admit the Cockpit architecture is not entirely clear to me, but at least it seems to allow using SSH as a remote transport, so you don't actually need to install the web stuff on all servers. GUIs are great for discoverability and observation, but they always make my life harder when I actually need to manage change in a system. As simple as it is, there's so far nothing that beats plain old text as the source of truth for how things should be; even if you have a fancy API to actually make changes into a system, you'd still want the desired state of that system to be stored as plain old text, so that changes may be tracked and reviewed easily.
- lmns 6y agoYou could have the best of both worlds and only modify the state of your system through a well defined API and then serialize the change in some kind of config file if and only if the change was successful (rollback to the last good state otherwise).