Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cockpit – Integrated, glanceable, web-based interface for servers

cockpit-project.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 130 posts

Re: Cockpit – Integrated, glanceable, web-based interface for servers

#91

Post by jeroenhd »

reidjs wrote: post #12

I installed on one of my ubuntu servers and allowed port 9090, but when I try accessing it from chrome it gives me a warning page "You cannot (IP) right now because the website sent scrambled credentials that Google Chrome cannot process." Is this because I run a NGINX server from that box?

This sounds like a certificate problem, or the browser trying to use https on an HTTP port. If you've deployed Let's Encrypt on the same host, the browser might force the connection to work over HTTPS because Let's Encrypt often adds a so-called HSTS header to the config.

If it's just Chrome not trusting the certificate, you can usually override the error by clicking "details" and then continuing by clicking a link. If the override isn't there (because of HSTS or similar), you can type "thisisunsafe" into the web page to override any non-technical certificate errors (there's no input field but it'll work)

Re: Cockpit – Integrated, glanceable, web-based interface for servers

#92

Post by chousuke »

tinco wrote: post #89
chousuke wrote: post #88

Has anyone tried to use this stuff at a scale of greater than a dozen servers? I briefly tried it in my homelab on CentOS 8, and immediately hit enough weirdness that I'm just back to SSH with Ansible now. I suppose having a GUI can be nice for a health overview of your infrastructure, but in general I dislike GUIs for actual administrative work, since using them is a practice that steers you away from automation. Mo…

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…

I 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.

Re: Cockpit – Integrated, glanceable, web-based interface for servers

#94

Post by rswail »

enobrev wrote: post #45
luplex wrote: post #35

Is there a reason why successfully running software on a server is so much harder than running software on your phone? I don't think it needs to be this way. Someone needs to figure out server software for consumers. Just like PCs became more accessible, so should servers! Edit: Brainstorming here: specifically, I'd like a more accessible UI, automatic updates, sensible defaults on all apps, an easier way to get star…

The affected user base is considerably different. When I update an app on my phone, if it fails or changes considerably, it only affects me. When I update anything on a server(s), it's going to affect hundreds, thousands, or even millions of other people and getting back to the state it was in before the update can cost hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars, not to mention potential money lost from the affected…

Exactly the same can happen by rolling out a buggy app to millions of other people. You can "brick" their app, and then have to work out how to get the fix rolled out to every user.

Updating a server is much cheaper than that.

Re: Cockpit – Integrated, glanceable, web-based interface for servers

#95

Post by effie »

luplex wrote: post #35

Is there a reason why successfully running software on a server is so much harder than running software on your phone? I don't think it needs to be this way. Someone needs to figure out server software for consumers. Just like PCs became more accessible, so should servers! Edit: Brainstorming here: specifically, I'd like a more accessible UI, automatic updates, sensible defaults on all apps, an easier way to get star…

> Is there a reason why successfully running software on a server is so much harder than running software on your phone?

Yes. "running software on a server" is actually done when running a business, which requires careful attention to detail, quality of service, actual work and dedication to customers. "running software on a phone" is just being a consumer, the hard part of that is done by Google/Apple. In short, provider vs. consumer, it can't be easier to provide than to consume.

EDIT Yes one can run software on a server as easily as on a phone, it's just few clicks or installation command away. But most people running software on servers do not want that, because they want control and understanding and security etc... That is, not yet, maybe in future every family will have their own home NAS server with apps.

Re: Cockpit – Integrated, glanceable, web-based interface for servers

#96

Post by effie »

qbasic_forever wrote: post #55
luplex wrote: post #35

Is there a reason why successfully running software on a server is so much harder than running software on your phone? I don't think it needs to be this way. Someone needs to figure out server software for consumers. Just like PCs became more accessible, so should servers! Edit: Brainstorming here: specifically, I'd like a more accessible UI, automatic updates, sensible defaults on all apps, an easier way to get star…

I think you're asking a perfectly valid question. IMHO authentication is still an enormous mess and new standards like OAuth did nothing to improve it on the server side. On your phone app store there's a strong and trusted source of identity coming from Apple or Google. They know who you are, what you're allowed to do, etc. and can delegate that authority to your apps. On the server though... welcome to the wild wes…

It seems to me you are making it needlessly complicated (LDAP...). There are many tools for authenticated access to server with minimal cost in terms of administration. TLS+Letsencrypt+Basic HTTP auth, SSH, OpenVPN, Wireguard, etc.

Re: Cockpit – Integrated, glanceable, web-based interface for servers

#97

Post by effie »

Spivak wrote: post #67
Iwan-Zotow wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is there a reason why successfully running software on a server is so much harder than running software on your phone? Sure (exaggerating) phone - reboot is your FIRST option server - reboot is your LAST option

Huh? We reboot our servers all the time. We would never design an app that isn’t tolerant to losing servers somewhat arbitrarily. How else could you ever handle hardware failures?

There is probably a niche for unreasonable customers who require 99.9+% uptime but do not want to pay for clustering and redundant servers. The best way to achieve that is to have a physical server that never gets rebooted. HW failures happen but you can explain to the customer it isn't your fault.

Re: Cockpit – Integrated, glanceable, web-based interface for servers

#98

Post by nuker »

alanfranz wrote: post #81
nuker wrote: post #51

I'm searching for remote server file manager right now. I want to copy (and compare) large directories on same Linux server from my Macbook. Cannot find one so far. Cockpit: "here is no graphical file manager, and we don't plan to add one." https://github.com/cockpit-project/cockpit/issues/11011 CuberDuck: "FTP and SFTP do not support a copy operation." Is there a way with GUI?

Not sure about your CyberDuck problem, though. You should check your ssh server settings. I always use CyberDuck over ssh/sftp with my linux server.

When browsing remote server, I select a file, menu Edit - Copy. Go to another place on remote server, Edit - Paste. It starts downloading file to my macbook for some reason.

Re: Cockpit – Integrated, glanceable, web-based interface for servers

#99

Post by effie »

themacguffinman wrote: post #39
luplex wrote: post #35

Is there a reason why successfully running software on a server is so much harder than running software on your phone? I don't think it needs to be this way. Someone needs to figure out server software for consumers. Just like PCs became more accessible, so should servers! Edit: Brainstorming here: specifically, I'd like a more accessible UI, automatic updates, sensible defaults on all apps, an easier way to get star…

There's no demand for it. There are some small & generous groups (eg. linuxserver.io) who cater to the tiny niche of "homelabbers", but even that is somewhat passionate & skilled group of people. It's mostly a waste of time to cater to anyone lower. Like most niche hobbies, no one is getting paid enough to care about the lowest common denominator.

Indeed, and the reason for that, I think, is that if you are at a level of capabilities where you are able to provide services, you have specific needs and ideas about how your business works. You can't outsource your business logic and customer care to some mass product and stay in business.

Re: Cockpit – Integrated, glanceable, web-based interface for servers

#100

Post by effie »

e12e wrote: post #37
luplex wrote: post #35

Is there a reason why successfully running software on a server is so much harder than running software on your phone? I don't think it needs to be this way. Someone needs to figure out server software for consumers. Just like PCs became more accessible, so should servers! Edit: Brainstorming here: specifically, I'd like a more accessible UI, automatic updates, sensible defaults on all apps, an easier way to get star…

It's not a trivial thing - docker and sandstorm.io might be two examples of making some decent headway here. Just today I set up a postgres and ms sql server for testing - pretty much identically, running out of their own named docker containers (for those not aware, it's even more similar than it sounds, ms sql runs on Linux now).

Why do you want to run MS SQL on Linux? What will you do when the db gets locked or crashes? You call Microsoft and wait?
Post reply on HN