Why use this when Webmin has done the job for decades? https://webmin.com/
Does webmin use no resources when not in use? Couldn't find anything about it on the site
Cockpit: Web-based graphical interface for servers
191–199 of 199 posts
Re: Cockpit: Web-based graphical interface for servers
#192Love it-- but since I'm not using systemd, it's a no-go. Would love to see it support more diverse systems, but last I checked it's pretty tightly coupled and I'm not sure who would have the bandwidth to adapt it.
Are we still fighting systemd? Why beyond being different? Proudly announcing "but I don't use systemd" seems less like a humblebrag and more like an old man "get off my lawn"
You may not agree with the conclusions of people’s arguments but surely by now you’ve heard them, and they’re perfectly credible. The objections from day 1 haven’t changed.
Re: Cockpit: Web-based graphical interface for servers
#193People who decry graphical admin interfaces in favor of command line are missing the wood for the trees. Sure, clickops is no way to run a server - but neither, if we’re honest, is ssh. For a working machine, server state should be reproducible from scratch. Install an OS, add software, apply configuration, leave well alone. If you’re going in with ssh or cockpit you’re just going to screw something up. So the only r…
> “For a working machine, server state should be reproducible from scratch. Install an OS, add software, apply configuration, leave well alone.”
I presume you only run NixOS then?
Re: Cockpit: Web-based graphical interface for servers
#194It's "meh" level of quality, though. Useful for a very small subset and I would avoid it, if you're running a home server. (Cockpit's file server interface plugin is old and bad) I don't really know what you'd use it for? Maybe to do minor monitoring, but it's not great to admin.
Exactly. No idea why RH is endorsing the project. There's no practical use. Listing bunch of systemd services isn't going to be any more helpful than CLI output listing everything.
Re: Cockpit: Web-based graphical interface for servers
#195Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reason cockpit exists is systemd and dbus. Without them it would be much harder to develop.
That's true to some extent, but I think the real reason for the coupling is because that's just IBM's use-case and worldview. Cockpit is essentialy a wrapper over systemd commands, and one commentor has demonstrated how it could have been envisioned as a modular platform allowing end-users to wrap anything from direct kernel interfaces to entirely custom commands. They've made something useful and beautiful, but I wi…
Has it become some weird kind of virtue signaling to replace Red Hat with IBM?
Re: Cockpit: Web-based graphical interface for servers
#196What about webmin?
I used it in the past, it has plenty of modules and parse config, so you can edit them by hand too.
Re: Cockpit: Web-based graphical interface for servers
#197For others curious, https://github.com/cockpit-project/cockpit shows that it's written in several languages, with C at the #1 place, with JS and Python following. "src/cockpit" (main backend logic?) is Python.
Piggybacking off your comment I wonder how many other people really care about the tech stack used to create any product they are running on a server. What dependencies does it have? Do I need to be conscious of vulnerabilities in some logging library or Curl? And I also find it really interesting to see whether a product is programmed using one clear stack or a mixture.
you should. Your server uptime is a necessity, the less bloat on it the better. If this was in Java I'd probably balk. No, no you should absolutely care what's on your server and even what language it's in.
Re: Cockpit: Web-based graphical interface for servers
#198Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I get there is an important reason to have choice, but bragging about how you don't use systemd is just meme-y and comes from a place of (misplaced) elitism usually. I think you're projecting. No one bragged about such a thing, they just merely mentioned their specific situation. It's not all text-editor-wars and squabbles, as stated and even acknowledged before : there exist reasons aside from nerd elitism to choos…
> there exist reasons aside from nerd elitism to choose something other than systemd. name one.
three days later. Crickets.....
Re: Cockpit: Web-based graphical interface for servers
#199The cool thing about this project is that as it uses systemd's socket activation, it requires no server processes at all. There is no waste of resources when Cockpit is not being used. Accessing a page is literally the same as invoking a command-line tool (and quitting it). No more, no less. What a beautiful design.
I ended up reading more about this and looks like SSHD in Ubuntu 22.10 and later also uses systemd socket activation. So there should be no sshd process(es) started until someone SSHs in! https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/sshd-now-uses-socket-based-ac...
Ew