Admin of SCO (was Re: 386/486, well configured: HOW MANY USERS?)

Lyle Seaman lws at comm.WANG.COM
Thu Mar 1 11:52:41 AEST 1990


dacseg at uts.amdahl.com (Scott E. Garfinkle) writes:

>From article <129 at n4hgf.uucp>, by wht at n4hgf.uucp (Warren Tucker):
>>    SCO is _much_ easier to configure and administer.
>>    The C2 Trusted Computer features are for neurotics, paranoids,
>> left-brains, or worse yet government control freaks.  Not recommended
>> for sane human beings.
>I agree with the latter statement, though it somewhat contradicts the former
>statement -- there is *no* way to remove completely the secureware (C2/B1)
>stuff from SCO Unix.  Also, having installed/administerd both SCO Unix and
>ESIX, I wouldn't necessarily say that SCO is a *lot* better.

I too agree.  The single largest problem I have with administering SCO's
UNIX is that cockeyed C2 stuff.  Occasionally it becomes necessary to 
go in and manually hack on their database.  Fortunately, they didn't make
it _so_ complicated that I can't figure it out.  Of course, given that 
the folks at SCO don't much like the idea of people manually modifying 
their database, and given that they can't prevent it on a UNIX system,
their next step will probably be to so thoroughly obscureware everything
that you couldn't find your way around without a big ball of string.  What's
more, in a development group environment, when a user's directory is 
default drwx------, it's a great pain to explain to every PC owner that
she must change the permissions s.t. files can be shared among group
members.  etc, etc.
Lyle.
lws at comm.wang.com
 



More information about the Comp.unix.i386 mailing list