Hi folks,

I have a small LDAP setup running for centralized Linux authentication since years, using the NSS and PAM modules from PADL Software Pty Ltd.

A few weeks ago I found the nss-pam-ldapd from Arthur de Jong and found the architecture is promising and fixes some problems with the design of the PADL modules.

This project needs contributors, so if you

• have time
• know some C
• like LDAP
• have ideas
• can test

it would be nice to see you there.

I also contributed a line or two.

In some discussion about interfaces I followed, somebody said the wise words:

The only truly intuitive interface is the nipple

I’ve never seen it that way…

UPDATE: http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/2002/08/nipple.html does some research on it

A rant! A rant!

Today, somebody (thanks exaltis on Freenode) provided me a link to an OSNews article during a discussion about X. He told me it’s fun to read – I clicked.

In this article (also read the comments), Thom Holwerda talks about why the X Window System is bad and Linux needs a different graphics architecture. This article is nice to read and discusses existing problems in some applications and X server software.

All problems he talks about are real, yes. I can understand that he’s pissed off. And he, as end-user, wants a solution and a stable system.

But his conclusions that these problems come from the design of the X Window System itself are just wrong and show that he doesn’t know what the design of X is. X has enough problems in its design, but none of them are related to the problems in his article. He talks about bad design, but he actually means bad implementation. Even his example with driver crashes or driver updates are completely irrelevant for the X design, the X Window architecture allows ways to implement this. That nobody does this doesn’t mean it’s a design problem.

From what I can see in the text he just would say to me that he’s a user and not a tech and he doesn’t care and he just wants a working system.

Yes, right, he’s a user. That’s why he shouldn’t conclude it’s a design problem, he should just talk about what he knows and not about what he thinks he knows.