Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.
-
I see no value in Guacamole, personally. No Machine is a much better option.
-
@irj said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
I see no value in Guacamole, personally. No Machine is a much better option.
Doesn't deal with the web interface. NX requires a client. Guacamole is as much a front end to NX as it is to any other protocol.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@irj said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
I see no value in Guacamole, personally. No Machine is a much better option.
Doesn't deal with the web interface. NX requires a client. Guacamole is as much a front end to NX as it is to any other protocol.
I wonder how often you really need people with no technical expertise to connect remotely to a linux machine?
-
@irj said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
I see no value in Guacamole, personally. No Machine is a much better option.
Yeah, if you already have another remote gateway. Just about anything else looks good at the moment.
-
@irj said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@irj said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
I see no value in Guacamole, personally. No Machine is a much better option.
Doesn't deal with the web interface. NX requires a client. Guacamole is as much a front end to NX as it is to any other protocol.
I wonder how often you really need people with no technical expertise to connect remotely to a linux machine?
Why does it have to be without technical expertise?
For example, I have users on Chromebooks that need remote Linux access. How do they do that with NX? With Guac, it is easy.
Or anytime someone needs to work from a place where they can't install something.
How do you handle gateway services for NX, do you have a mechanism or just use different ports?
-
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@irj said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@irj said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
I see no value in Guacamole, personally. No Machine is a much better option.
Doesn't deal with the web interface. NX requires a client. Guacamole is as much a front end to NX as it is to any other protocol.
I wonder how often you really need people with no technical expertise to connect remotely to a linux machine?
For example, I have users on Chromebooks that need remote Linux access. \
SSH or RDP. I agree with @IRJ, it (Guacamole) just seems like a hassle.
-
@stacksofplates said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@irj said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@irj said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
I see no value in Guacamole, personally. No Machine is a much better option.
Doesn't deal with the web interface. NX requires a client. Guacamole is as much a front end to NX as it is to any other protocol.
I wonder how often you really need people with no technical expertise to connect remotely to a linux machine?
For example, I have users on Chromebooks that need remote Linux access. \
SSH or RDP. I agree with @IRJ, it (Guacamole) just seems like a hassle.
RDP is pretty cumbersome in some cases for that stuff. And does that mean no NX, or having to maintain multiple for each box?
I definitely find Guac worlds easier. For one thing, it maintains a list of available resources. So the access listing is centralized, rather than making people maintain it on desktops.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@stacksofplates said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@irj said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@irj said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
I see no value in Guacamole, personally. No Machine is a much better option.
Doesn't deal with the web interface. NX requires a client. Guacamole is as much a front end to NX as it is to any other protocol.
I wonder how often you really need people with no technical expertise to connect remotely to a linux machine?
For example, I have users on Chromebooks that need remote Linux access. \
SSH or RDP. I agree with @IRJ, it (Guacamole) just seems like a hassle.
RDP is pretty cumbersome in some cases for that stuff. And does that mean no NX, or having to maintain multiple for each box?
I definitely find Guac worlds easier. For one thing, it maintains a list of available resources. So the access listing is centralized, rather than making people maintain it on desktops.
I've never found d RDP cumbersome. I'm not talking about using NX on a Chromebook. Anything that isn't a Chromebook, NX is easier. For the Chromebook people SSH is native RDP is easy.
This whole thread is around how Guacamole isn't easy. You also don't need this to have a centralized list. If you're using CM you're going to have a list of systems anyway.
-
@stacksofplates said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@stacksofplates said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@irj said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@irj said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
I see no value in Guacamole, personally. No Machine is a much better option.
Doesn't deal with the web interface. NX requires a client. Guacamole is as much a front end to NX as it is to any other protocol.
I wonder how often you really need people with no technical expertise to connect remotely to a linux machine?
For example, I have users on Chromebooks that need remote Linux access. \
SSH or RDP. I agree with @IRJ, it (Guacamole) just seems like a hassle.
RDP is pretty cumbersome in some cases for that stuff. And does that mean no NX, or having to maintain multiple for each box?
I definitely find Guac worlds easier. For one thing, it maintains a list of available resources. So the access listing is centralized, rather than making people maintain it on desktops.
I've never found d RDP cumbersome. I'm not talking about using NX on a Chromebook. Anything that isn't a Chromebook, NX is easier. For the Chromebook people SSH is native RDP is easy.
This whole thread is around how Guacamole isn't easy. You also don't need this to have a centralized list. If you're using CM you're going to have a list of systems anyway.
CM?
-
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@stacksofplates said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@stacksofplates said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@irj said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@irj said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
I see no value in Guacamole, personally. No Machine is a much better option.
Doesn't deal with the web interface. NX requires a client. Guacamole is as much a front end to NX as it is to any other protocol.
I wonder how often you really need people with no technical expertise to connect remotely to a linux machine?
For example, I have users on Chromebooks that need remote Linux access. \
SSH or RDP. I agree with @IRJ, it (Guacamole) just seems like a hassle.
RDP is pretty cumbersome in some cases for that stuff. And does that mean no NX, or having to maintain multiple for each box?
I definitely find Guac worlds easier. For one thing, it maintains a list of available resources. So the access listing is centralized, rather than making people maintain it on desktops.
I've never found d RDP cumbersome. I'm not talking about using NX on a Chromebook. Anything that isn't a Chromebook, NX is easier. For the Chromebook people SSH is native RDP is easy.
This whole thread is around how Guacamole isn't easy. You also don't need this to have a centralized list. If you're using CM you're going to have a list of systems anyway.
CM?
Configuration management.
-
@travisdh1 said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
Huh, it is unstable. That really sucks.
This is what I was talking about. I get the same thing. Glad I'm not the only one.
-
@stacksofplates said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@stacksofplates said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@stacksofplates said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@irj said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@irj said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
I see no value in Guacamole, personally. No Machine is a much better option.
Doesn't deal with the web interface. NX requires a client. Guacamole is as much a front end to NX as it is to any other protocol.
I wonder how often you really need people with no technical expertise to connect remotely to a linux machine?
For example, I have users on Chromebooks that need remote Linux access. \
SSH or RDP. I agree with @IRJ, it (Guacamole) just seems like a hassle.
RDP is pretty cumbersome in some cases for that stuff. And does that mean no NX, or having to maintain multiple for each box?
I definitely find Guac worlds easier. For one thing, it maintains a list of available resources. So the access listing is centralized, rather than making people maintain it on desktops.
I've never found d RDP cumbersome. I'm not talking about using NX on a Chromebook. Anything that isn't a Chromebook, NX is easier. For the Chromebook people SSH is native RDP is easy.
This whole thread is around how Guacamole isn't easy. You also don't need this to have a centralized list. If you're using CM you're going to have a list of systems anyway.
CM?
Configuration management.
Okay, wasn't sure. Yes, pushing out NX configs shouldn't be too bad, in theory.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@stacksofplates said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@stacksofplates said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@stacksofplates said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@irj said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@irj said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
I see no value in Guacamole, personally. No Machine is a much better option.
Doesn't deal with the web interface. NX requires a client. Guacamole is as much a front end to NX as it is to any other protocol.
I wonder how often you really need people with no technical expertise to connect remotely to a linux machine?
For example, I have users on Chromebooks that need remote Linux access. \
SSH or RDP. I agree with @IRJ, it (Guacamole) just seems like a hassle.
RDP is pretty cumbersome in some cases for that stuff. And does that mean no NX, or having to maintain multiple for each box?
I definitely find Guac worlds easier. For one thing, it maintains a list of available resources. So the access listing is centralized, rather than making people maintain it on desktops.
I've never found d RDP cumbersome. I'm not talking about using NX on a Chromebook. Anything that isn't a Chromebook, NX is easier. For the Chromebook people SSH is native RDP is easy.
This whole thread is around how Guacamole isn't easy. You also don't need this to have a centralized list. If you're using CM you're going to have a list of systems anyway.
CM?
Configuration management.
Okay, wasn't sure. Yes, pushing out NX configs shouldn't be too bad, in theory.
NoMachine finds all of the systems in a network. For example, if you're on ZT it will list all available clients on that network. I was saying if you just wanted a list for people to SSH/RDP to, you already have it.
-
@stacksofplates said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@stacksofplates said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@stacksofplates said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@stacksofplates said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@irj said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@scottalanmiller said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
@irj said in Fedora 28 Guacamole base install.:
I see no value in Guacamole, personally. No Machine is a much better option.
Doesn't deal with the web interface. NX requires a client. Guacamole is as much a front end to NX as it is to any other protocol.
I wonder how often you really need people with no technical expertise to connect remotely to a linux machine?
For example, I have users on Chromebooks that need remote Linux access. \
SSH or RDP. I agree with @IRJ, it (Guacamole) just seems like a hassle.
RDP is pretty cumbersome in some cases for that stuff. And does that mean no NX, or having to maintain multiple for each box?
I definitely find Guac worlds easier. For one thing, it maintains a list of available resources. So the access listing is centralized, rather than making people maintain it on desktops.
I've never found d RDP cumbersome. I'm not talking about using NX on a Chromebook. Anything that isn't a Chromebook, NX is easier. For the Chromebook people SSH is native RDP is easy.
This whole thread is around how Guacamole isn't easy. You also don't need this to have a centralized list. If you're using CM you're going to have a list of systems anyway.
CM?
Configuration management.
Okay, wasn't sure. Yes, pushing out NX configs shouldn't be too bad, in theory.
NoMachine finds all of the systems in a network. For example, if you're on ZT it will list all available clients on that network. I was saying if you just wanted a list for people to SSH/RDP to, you already have it.
What we want, ideally, is not to use something like ZT (although it's an option that we will kick around), and not to make a list for everyone. But to have a portal (or something like a portal) that lists all of the machines available specifically to the person in question. We have specific pools and assigned boxes. For example, Maggie has a dedicated machine just for her, I don't want to see it in my list. And she doesn't want to see mine. But we both want to see remote machines dedicated for something we share.
