13 Aug
2020
13 Aug
'20
3:47 a.m.
You liked SMIT, it seems, I am among a large swath of people who did not.
The SMIT I had did *not* show you what files it was editing and I ran
SMIT on 1GB main memory powerpcs. I think it was AIX 4.something.
Maybe it got better but it was awful for me.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 10:00:09AM +1000, Dave Horsfall wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020, Larry McVoy wrote:
--
---
Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 07:12:57PM -0400, Richard
Salz wrote:
Me neither. SMIT was HORRIBLE if you understood the files in /etc and
knew what to do with them. It might be nice if you had no understanding
of how to admin a Unix system and here is this "nice" curses based way to
do admin.
SMIT was one just one of the systems that I had to sysadmin (along with
Open/Xenix (hah!), Slowaris, PH-UX (as we called it), etc; I narrowly
avoided Windoze, along with denying all knowledge of COBOL.
SMIT was
quite nice [ context seemingly removed ]
i have never seen those four words together like that before. To anyone remotely competent, and I don't
mean edit sendmail.cf, I mean
you can edit inetd.conf, you can edit a crontab file, etc, SMIT was a
nightmare that made something that should be vi $FILE, done 20 seconds
later, a hellish journey through their menus. It was AWFUL.
Quite, because I liked the way that SMIT showed you the obtuse command that
was being executed, so you could run it yourself with modifications.
Ask me how I know.
Ditto...
-- Dave