reactos in client/server?

[Floyd]

in the future of development, do you foresee a client and a server ISO of react available? (i think this would make sense).

if so, i would like to suggest hmailserver be included on the server-side of things (along with AMP).

hmail, apache, mysql, php and squirrelmail would be an awesome combo (along with some kind of domain-like model for networks as well as the obvious dDNS and possibly WINS--though MS is phasing out WINS).

So there's LAMP, WAMP, WIMP and (hopefully) RAMP


http://www.hmailserver.com/

[geertvdijk]

in the future of development, do you foresee a client and a server ISO of react available? (i think this would make sense).

if so, i would like to suggest hmailserver be included on the server-side of things (along with AMP).

hmail, apache, mysql, php and squirrelmail would be an awesome combo (along with some kind of domain-like model for networks as well as the obvious dDNS and possibly WINS--though MS is phasing out WINS).

So there's LAMP, WAMP, WIMP and (hopefully) RAMP


http://www.hmailserver.com/

why RAMP if a Windows version already is there?

[Ged]

ROS will be both client and server. No need for 2 distros.
Server software will be available via the package manager.

[Wierd]

And "Server" services could be turned on with an "Extra dialog" in the second stage installer, which is interactive, asking what the desired server type is, so that EG-- a PDC isnt running Apache and an FTP daemon-- and so on, and so forth. This would be a big step up from MS offerings, in that you would be given the CHOICE of what services to have on when you next reboot-- rather than having to go through and disable tons of things that you will never need if you are just using it as a workstation.

I like the "Assume limited workstation, unless specifically told to be otherwise" approach, and would lend itself well to the second stage installer.

[Ged]

There won't be all that many services shipped with ROS. Most things will be available as addons. Thus you will install a base system, and will build up your own environment as you install software.

People installing OOo, Firefox, Thunderbird, etc, will obviously be building up a desktop environment. People installing Apache, Perl, FileZilla Server, Pegasus Mail Server, etc will be building up a server environment.

Built in services like Firewalls and Samba will be configured according to requirement.


Apart from the number of processors and number of network connections, (which is a limitation ROS won't have), there isn't all that much difference between Windows desktop and Windows server system. It's all in the software.

[Floyd]

ROS will be both client and server. No need for 2 distros.
Server software will be available via the package manager.

i like the way NT and ubuntu did and are doing it. pre-package a server and a client. it would save so much time for end-users; a do it once so a thousand people don't have to do it. especially when you consider it doesn't add all that much and urges a certain hegemony and predictability to the operating system and its use.

basic server daemons (aside from DNS and a SMB/ADS or NIS like service) would be web+php+ftp (~13.5mb to match IIS) and potentially a mail daemon (4mb) (it still baffles me why windows server didn't offer basic POP3 services--though 2003 R2 does offer POP3 now). when you consider that these 4 apps i mentioned total to less than 20 mb on a windows system (imagine trying to download fedora core on a modem! 5 cds!)

[Floyd]

( SNIP )

So there's LAMP, WAMP, WIMP and (hopefully) RAMP


http://www.hmailserver.com/

why RAMP if a Windows version already is there?

i'm guessing you mean WAMP? i actually like IIS, but the WIMP acronym is a bit mean. there'll never be a RIMP so RAMP is about as close as it'll get. but asking why use RAMP when WIMP is available is like saying why use react when windows is available.

also, the reason you'd want to use WAMP instead of WIMP is because IIS doesn't always work well with PHP; whereas apache and PHP were made to work together and i've never had PHP barf on a WAMP system where i've had it barf on WIMP

mostly when i use non-standard permissions on a folder--specifically with the IUSR_ account; such as setting deny all to IUSR_ and then setting RX permissions for domain accounts to force prompting of authentication. it doesn't always cause problems, but it has happened to me.

[Floyd]

There isn't all that much difference between Windows desktop and Windows server system. It's all in the software.

that's all an OS is anyway, software. windows server is keyed different that the workstation and now they come off of different forks of the windows code. but even if that weren't true, they come prepackaged with certain bundles of software to help the end user not only in terms of getting started faster, but having commonalities that help users get help easier.

when you consider that windows desktop comes with web, asp, ftp, smtp, network resolvers, a basic write and draw program, a web browser and email client -- it's easy to appreciate that you don't have to download all that crud yourself. you can just install and start using it that same day. (one cd -- take away the support tools and the adverts and it slims down a lot)

but on the other hand you consider windows server 2003 R2 comes with web, asp, ftp, smtp, pop3, network resolvers as well as ADS, DNS, WINS, basic NIS for UNIX, basic write and draw, web browser, email client and now even comes with microsoft sharepoint (you can basically set up your portal immediately) and with vista server come with virtual server software it's easy to see that an administrator would have the tools they would to set up a server right away. if they so choose, they can download different types of software -- they still have choice but they also have convenience and a resource to go to if they need help as there is system hegemony. R2 takes two cds but again, if you took away the "extras" it would slim down.

yes, it's "just" software but you define its value by what you present. i think it's clear that both microsoft and apple understand this.

[Jaix]

Package manager will have this function.
When ReactOS is installed you will be facing the Package manager, it will give you some standard suggestions, like: Server, WebServer, Client, Portable, Developer and Custom.

These options each will chose for you a standard selection of software that will be downloaded and installed without too much interaction from you.

[Bond007s]

I see the great benifits both ways. I work at a school though, and I see the advantages of having ReactOS Packaged CD with automation so that I could deploy this OS to all the school computers (if I am still here and when it is functional). I spoke to the Network Admin and he was quite interested. However, it is not ready yet, so I see no point until it is usable, but in the future I see the point to have a CD with downloaded packages or such. We have a couple of thousand computers, 7-9 sites (two are quite small being the transportation office and the maintenance office) and only at this time can afford a 3 meg connection (2 T1s) for internet. 300 students have their own laptops by a grant from the state and possibly 600 more may be coming. Yes our internet is in need of an upgrade. However let me speak reasonably, I cannot afford all the computers to be downloading software (I can barely allow a few computers to download software this intensive) to set them up. Let me face it there are certain advantages to downloading off the internet (get the newest version for one). However there are more advantages in my case to have them on CDs. I could burn a few hundred CDs and set up most of our schools in two or so weeks with the other technicians, something that could take a lot longer. In that time, there are advantages that would allow the servers to host the updates at each site, however when this could be accomplished (in the summer, unless summer school comes) there is often a lot of work being done on the servers and I do not want them tied up at all. I do see both points, but could the package manager accomplish this by running during set up and using the same unattended.txt file and have the option of choosing to install from the CD (where if compiled, certain packages could reside). Only my thoughts...

[Floyd]

Package manager will have this function.
When ReactOS is installed you will be facing the Package manager, it will give you some standard suggestions, like: Server, WebServer, Client, Portable, Developer and Custom.

These options each will chose for you a standard selection of software that will be downloaded and installed without too much interaction from you.

but the point remains that using a package manager post-install still means that you've got an unusable system after you "install" it. and also, with a cd that means you can set up services offline. the servers i build do not go online until they are ready to be 'live'. (that also fails to address development machines where someone may want to test services but not have access to the internet to obtain the appropriate set up files).

having the files on the cd is not just a matter of convenience but also one of security. having windows compatibility also means you are opening yourself up to most of the windows viruses, and having to go online before getting a chance to set up the OS is just craziness.

since in the last two years alone i have set up 2 win2000 servers, 2 win2003 servers, 1 win2003 R2 server, 1 linux Ubuntu server, 2 XP "servers" and when the parts i've ordered come, two more win2003 servers (upgrading one of the win2000 servers -- i definitely appreciate having the files there on cd. (and this doesn't even address the 150 clients i maintain).

also, using office 2003 as an example--a program which installs files after you "install" the program upon first load--is that having to configure the system after you "install" it is a frustrating experience.

by putting files on the distributed system you are adding to the size, but as i've already pointed out the difference is miniscule and the benefit is huge.

ultimately do what you want, but i think it's a big mistake to write it off like that. from my experiences alone, i can tell you requiring internet access to finalize a system is a Bad Idea (tm).

[Bond007s]

I also will be replacing 5 Windows 2000 Server Systems from scratch with Windows 2003 R2 (That is not tranfering Active Directory, but instead exporting a comma deliminated file of users and importing them into a new domain that is no longer 9 domains, but instead one complete domain for all teachers and one seperate child domain (for security issues) for students. We developed a Visual Basic program to reimport our users... (As Active Directory allows exports of users but not imports as far as I know of, please correct me if I am wrong.) I Agree that I am grately appreciated of having basically all the software to set up a server (Web Server, Domain Controllers, as well as a variety of other servers. I agree that the package manger is sufficient for now, but as the OS begins to approach 1.0 (hey even 4.0 series, as it is becoming pretty compatible now) a better approach is needed. I agree that the package manager should remain, but other systems could be cloned (mimiced or whatever you call it) to allow programs similar to IIS and FTP and Email based programs, Firefox preinstalled, and Open Office. Beyond that, I don't think anything other needs to be included. The developers could include the rest of the programs thru the package manager. These basic programs would be great to have. Basically anything that is included with Windows should be in included (plus in my opinion also OpenOffice). The distros should stay very small and able to fit on one CD whenever possible. This is just my idea. However at this time I don't think these need to be included as the installers for some of these don't work and have issues. I think until ReactOS is stable enough it should not include extra software beside the very basic components...Correct me if I am wrong in my assumtions...

[Floyd]

I Agree that I am grately appreciated of having basically all the software to set up a server (Web Server, Domain Controllers, as well as a variety of other servers. I agree that the package manger is sufficient for now, but as the OS begins to approach 1.0 (hey even 4.0 series, as it is becoming pretty compatible now) a better approach is needed. I agree that the package manager should remain, but other systems could be cloned (mimiced or whatever you call it) to allow programs similar to IIS and FTP and Email based programs, Firefox preinstalled, and Open Office. Beyond that, I don't think anything other needs to be included.

well, i'm not saying those components need to be included in reactOS now; saying that is obviously premature. reactOS isn't ready for a production environment yet.

but eventually if react is going to be seriously considered, it needs to emulate some of the more mature players in the OS game. that includes providing a write program, web browser (even a simple one) and email client for desktops and some common server services for a server flavor.

[Z98]

Or an ISO creator/editor is used/made available for the end user to image whatever they may need. I think Vista Enterprise is supposed to have that feature, and it would certainly be useful if ReactOS incorporated something like that in the future.

[Jaix]

I totally agree, there is sertainly good reasons to include a bunch of softwares on the Installation CD/DVD, but actually, this can be done with the Package Manager, it's just to make it able to choose from CD/DVD/HD/LAN/Internet as a source for the packages.

Plus I do agree it should be possible to do this in just two stages of installation so all packages can be selected and installed during second face of the installation. Thus package manager should be one of the screens of second face install along with some config wizard for the selected packages.