I used to have this, but it takes up so much resources. not fit for small servers.
Cockpit is a web-based graphical interface for servers
71–80 of 188 posts
Re: Cockpit is a web-based graphical interface for servers
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
I need to know more about this.
Probably [1], [2] [1] https://psdoom.sourceforge.net/ [2] https://psdoom.sourceforge.net/screenshots.html
Thanks. I like the spirit of this.
I will not assume any liability for damage caused from running this code. Especially if you are running it as root. In fact, we both know that this will cause damage to the system, and that's why you want to try it. You have been warned.
Re: Cockpit is a web-based graphical interface for servers
#73I have used cockpit and like it. It allows me to quickly see the entirety of my system. But, it doesn't offer any way to review my incus containers. So, I tried wolfstack, which was recently listed on HN. It appears it only supports lxc. I'm surprised, isn't lxc and incus more or less 1:1 synonymous (unless you get into recent more complexities)? I'm feeling like it is hard to find a simple GUI to just review a syste…
Do you mean LXD and Incus? If so, sort of. Incus is a fork of LXD but it diverged quite a bit and due to the LXD licensing change, Incus can't take anything from LXD but LXD can from Incus. Incus is a community project and is a lot more active. They both use LXC under the hood.
Finding a simple GUI is not going to be easy because everyone has a different definition of what "simple" means. It also depends on what you mean by "review" and "manage". There were a few web UIs for LXD containers and they were ported or used for Incus containers. Some are still maintained and active.
I personally prefer the command line and find it easier and simpler than using graphical interfaces so don't have a recommendation. When the number of containers and servers becomes large enough to warrant anything else, then that's when automation starts.
Re: Cockpit is a web-based graphical interface for servers
#74Reminds me of cpanel, from the late 1900s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CPanel
My own early sysadmin experience was with Ubuntu eBox and I hated it. Because none of the expected configuration files or commands you would find on Stackoverflow would work on a eBox managed server. You would do configuration through the UI or nothing.
The debugging was also impossible, because logs were not in the expected places and standard grep on log and conf files would give you nothing.
Cockpit is way better than that. Partially because of systemd, but also dbus and other relatively new APIs in the Linux plumbing layer, which finally allowed us to implement consistent and stateless management UI of a system.
Re: Cockpit is a web-based graphical interface for servers
#75I tried using this to handle my 10-ish Docker containers, but I ended up using Portainer. Sure, not the same thing, but if someone (like me) thought Cockpit might be nice for managing a small Docker host, this didn't work for me
Portainer still needs to be run as rootful container? Then thanks, but no thanks.
Re: Cockpit is a web-based graphical interface for servers
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
Part of the technical assessment I have for hiring new platform engineers involves troubleshooting a service hosted in a headless Linux vm. Troubleshooting and fluency on the command line are among what I consider core skills. Being able to dig through abstraction layers is not just essential for when things go wrong, they are essential for building infrastructure, and really tells you whether an architecture is fit…
One of my favorite interview questions: "Here are some SSH credentials. What does this system do?" Sometimes there aren't any docs. Sometimes the docs are wrong. It's important to be able to establish what the actual running situation is.
When I was interviewing people on behalf of a client, I was surprised at the number of people who didn't even know what SSH was. This was for a mid-level software developer and not a junior and they all came with glowing resumes.
They all insisted that it was essential to have a CI/CD process but didn't even know what the "CD" part even did. Apparently you just "git push" and the code magically gets on the server. There are many ways to do deployments and a CI/CD process isn't always suitable and can have many forms, in my opinion, but I was happy to discuss any and all. But it's difficult to do that without the basics. As you said, before I was commissioned the platform had no documentation, was crumbling under tech debt and failing constantly so something like getting on the server to at least figure out what's going on was essential.
Re: Cockpit is a web-based graphical interface for servers
#77The very first thing I remove when I install Fedora. It's such a bloat that only takes up space and memory for most people.
Same!
remove cockpit*, install fish shell :-)
Re: Cockpit is a web-based graphical interface for servers
#78I don‘t like the whole idea because it is less secure to have a web browser instead of a standard client. Think what an attacker could do if they take control of the server.
Me too, I set up a WG tunnel to access this.
Re: Cockpit is a web-based graphical interface for servers
#79I tried using this to handle my 10-ish Docker containers, but I ended up using Portainer. Sure, not the same thing, but if someone (like me) thought Cockpit might be nice for managing a small Docker host, this didn't work for me
Going for a shameless plug - I am working on an observability dashboard for Docker Swarm: https://github.com/Radiergummi/cetacean Also works for a single node cluster. Maybe that’s closer to what you’re looking for.
can you please add some screenshots?