Posted on 05/31/2007 9:33:17 PM PDT by Swordmaker
OS X boot process with info about runlevels: http://www.kernelthread.com/mac/osx/arch_startup.html
Just three letters to add to your list: SAP.
http://www.kernelthread.com/mac/osx/arch_startup.html
Excellent. Someday, when I get to spend a fair amount of quality time with a Mac, I'll be able to make use of that!
In a rack of multiple xServes, all of them can be administered by the GUI on just one... or from a workstation connected to the servers... and that one will drop the GUI back to idle and non-RAM usage when the administrator signs off.
I'm not a hard-core *nix admin. What in that sounds most useful to you?
"I definitely say Apple's enterprise support is lacking compared to someone like Sun, which is very good," said Andrew Oliver, director of operations at LiveWorld Inc., a provider of Web conferencing services for companies including Intel Corp., BEA Systems Inc., Campbell Soup Co. and eBay Inc. LiveWorld has an Apple data center deployment of about 120 Xserve dual-processor systems.Luckily, Sun is a much better value than the Macs, so Andy O can just keep getting those instead. /sarc
I have always been suspicious of that. My first introduction to Apple (I am now a convert) was in a co. where each mgr. could choose pc's or Apples for his or her dep't. My dep't was Apple.
The co. had 300 people at our location, and 200 used pc's; 100 used Apples. The IT dep't had 10 employees. 9 were pc specialists and 1 was Apple. Hmmm -
Mostly that you have more control over what's loaded than you do on, say, a windoze box. I have servers that I use for some of our prototyping work that doesn't even have a keyboard, mouse, or monitor attached to. Most Unix variants have a concept known as a 'runlevel' that tells the system to start up certain processes and/or services at each one. Let's say I want to do something like maybe expand the size of the /home partition. I'd boot the system in single-user mode where the vast majority of services aren't available. (On a headless system you'd need something like an ILO card to give you console access when network services aren't there.) In single user mode, I can unmount the /home partition, (it may not even be initially mounted in runlevel 1), resize the volume, then bring it up to runlevel 3 or 5.
Most computers I use regularly boot up in runlevel 3 which doesn't fire up the X server unless I want it to. Even though it would be swapped out if unused, it's still eating up virtual memory, and enough cpu/interrupts to keep it active. A system that is primarily a web server, application server, email, or DNS don't actually need a graphical interface, so I figure it makes more sense not to have it running. You'd normally be accessing them by SSH for command line access and SCP for moving files on and off the server. Telnet and ftp are evil daemons whence come more security issues than can be named.
The gui itself on an X-based system opens unsecure ports that I prefer to have closed unless I absolutely need them.
I admit that I don't know a heck of a lot more than bare generalities as far as the GUI goes with OSX, but I figure it probably presents more of a profile to an attacker than ssh does. I look forward to having a chance to explore it more though, as it seems to have proven to be fairly robust against attacks so far.
The bottom line, is that for many things, I prefer to use a command line rather than a GUI. For other things, a GUI is better (like workstations). To me as a good admin, I figure you present the smallest profile to attack, and maximize system resources where youj can.
On a headless system you'd need something like an ILO card to give you console access
An XServe probably has you covered between the EFI and serial connection.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.