[comp.unix.questions] Maintenence-free UNIX?

RMG3@psuvm.psu.edu (10/09/90)

  The question is - 'Is maintenence-free UNIX an oxymoron?'
  I have a very serious reason for asking the question, humorous
though it may seem at first glance.  I and another person have been
the system administrators for a set of SUNs here running the SUN OS
derivative of BSD.  A faculty member recently left on sabbatical, taking
a SUN 386i (also running unix) with him.  The problem is that he is not
a computer person, much less a unix guru.  Several things have happened
on the system which appear to have been avoidable by a knowledgeable
unix user, but probably not otherwise (system crashes and devices not
being recognized, for example).

  So can we set up _something_ on the system so that the system will run
without being touched by the hands of an administrator?  It needs to be
able to print, make tape backups, and support an ethernet connection.  The
user can change tapes (or disks) when told, but shouldn't have to know the
commands to issue.  We have come to the conclusion that unix as an operating
system is something like a Lambourghini (sp?) -- very powerful in the hands
of a skilled user, but it needs frequent retuning, also by a skilled person.

  It seems (vaguely) that BSD is more 'touchy' than SYSV.  The HP-UX version
(based on system 5)(what is the word for 'been the administrator of'?)
I had administered^ a couple years ago would run about 4 months between
bouts of serious intervention.  The SUN-OS system seems to require serious
intervention at least monthly.  Is it a common observation that BSD requires
a more active administrator than SYSV?

Thanks,
  If response warrants, I'll summarize to the group.

Bob Grumbine a.k.a. rmg3@psuvm.psu.edu

dkeisen@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (Dave Eisen) (10/10/90)

In article <90282.125053RMG3@psuvm.psu.edu> RMG3@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>
>  The question is - 'Is maintenence-free UNIX an oxymoron?'
>  I have a very serious reason for asking the question, humorous
>though it may seem at first glance. 


I don't think it's a humorous question at all, it's a serious issue for
my company. We sell point of sales systems (we wrote a device driver
that allows a cash register to talk to a Xenix box and software to
do price lookup, inventory control, accounting, etc.) running on Xenix
to people who are incapable of using (or unwilling to learn) vi, let 
alone administer a Unix system. The current policy of our major contract
is to let their distributors decide whether or not to even give anyone on 
site the root password! This forces us to make the system run by itself.

It is no small task to make a UNIX system maintenance-free. I wouldn't
try to pretend that we've succeeded.



--
Dave Eisen                      	    Home: (415) 323-9757
dkeisen@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU           Office: (415) 967-5644
1447 N. Shoreline Blvd.
Mountain View, CA 94043

gentry@kcdev.UUCP (Art Gentry) (10/11/90)

>In article <90282.125053RMG3@psuvm.psu.edu> RMG3@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>
>  The question is - 'Is maintenence-free UNIX an oxymoron?'
>  I have a very serious reason for asking the question, humorous
>though it may seem at first glance. 

That is a very reasonable question, with a very unreasonable answer.  It's
damn tough, if not impossible to make unix totally maintenance free.  That's
why my company offers a service that make a unix system maintenance free,
as far as the users are concerned.  We do remote system admin/mgmt.  For
a set fee per month (depends on the size of the installation), we take 
care of all the mundane (and not so mundane) tasks in keeping a unix box
well fed and happy.  That way all the users have to worry about is running
thier applications.  There are just too many things that still need a
human interface to be able to totally automate it.
---
| R. Arthur Gentry  Gentry and Associates  Excelsior Springs,  MO  64024 |
| Email: gentry@genco.uucp          ATTMail: attmail!kc4rtm!gentry       |
| The UNIX BBS: 816-221-0475        The Bedroom BBS: 816-637-4183        |
| $include {std_disclaimer.h}       "I will make a guess" - Spock - STIV |

jmm@eci386.uucp (John Macdonald) (10/11/90)

In article <1990Oct10.161242.3423@Neon.Stanford.EDU> dkeisen@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (Dave Eisen) writes:
|In article <90282.125053RMG3@psuvm.psu.edu> RMG3@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
|>
|>  The question is - 'Is maintenence-free UNIX an oxymoron?'
|>  I have a very serious reason for asking the question, humorous
|>though it may seem at first glance. 
|
|
|I don't think it's a humorous question at all, it's a serious issue for
|my company. We sell point of sales systems (we wrote a device driver
|that allows a cash register to talk to a Xenix box and software to
|do price lookup, inventory control, accounting, etc.) running on Xenix
|to people who are incapable of using (or unwilling to learn) vi, let 
|alone administer a Unix system. The current policy of our major contract
|is to let their distributors decide whether or not to even give anyone on 
|site the root password! This forces us to make the system run by itself.
|
|It is no small task to make a UNIX system maintenance-free. I wouldn't
|try to pretend that we've succeeded.

Warning: commercial service description to follow...

Our company has a service offering called ERSA - Expert
Remote Systems Assurance (announced in comp.newprod in
August, check your archives or send me email for a copy).
It provides remote systems maintainence for ANY type of
Unix (Xenix System III, version 7, Sys V, BSD, split universe,
etc.).  It is highly extensible for local control, or for
adding customized support modules.  We mostly try to deal
with computer service providers - system manufacturers,
VARs, etc. rather than end users.

If requested, I can discuss technical aspects further in
this forum.  If you have business questions, try email,
snail mail or phone.

mail    Elegant Communications Inc.
        602 - 481 University Ave.
        Toronto, Ont., Canada, M5G 2E9

phone   +1 416 595-5425

fax     +1 416 595-5439 (working hours only - the line is
                        attached to a modem at night)
-- 
Cure the common code...                      | John Macdonald
...Ban Basic      - Christine Linge          |   jmm@eci386