Re: Configuration Tool(s)

[Nick Mathewson <nickm@mit.edu>]

David Freeman wrote:
 [snip]
>Looking at the timeline for a future SEUL release, it seems as if COAS
>may be ready by then as well.  I don't know much about COAS, but since
>it is in alpha, I would imagine that COAS working group would be happy
>to include any additions or suggestions SEUL has.  Of course, the
>minuses against it include the fact that it is still in alpha, and makes
>it difficult for SEUL to work with a copy that is a fairly definite
>model of the finished product.

Hmm... I'm looking at COAS (at http://www.coas.org/), and liking what
I see (from the developer's point of view).  The architecture seems
very clean and well-planned, and the module-writing API seems simple.
(I much prefer the module-writer's task in COAS to that in LinuxConf.)
I'm going to try this one out as well, and would also like others to
give it a go.

It too has deficiencies: to begin with, its only GUI's are in Qt and
Java -- but it seems fairly portable, and efforts are already underway
to write a frontend in some other toolkit.  It is, as David mentioned,
still in alpha, and doesn't have nearly as many modules as Linuxconf.
Modules must be written in C++ or Python.

(Note: one feature which I didn't mention in a configuration tool, and
which neither COAS nor LinuxConf (AFAIK) currently does, is the
ability to handle dotfiles as well as system files.  The issues
involved are similar enough that I think using a single tool for both
tasks may prove successful.)

Yours,

--
Nick Mathewson \\   (seul-dev-admin group leader)
nickm@mit.edu  //