The concept of a GUI wrapper on top of the Linux ecosystem is what's broken.

Not because of a fundamental limitation of that architecture, but because in practice the type of people that will use it do not want to learn or develop the necessary skills to administer it, and critical information like man pages and parameter lists are hidden.

You can't take shortcuts without consequences.

▲

walrus01 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Remember 'webmin'?

As someone who pretty much exclusively uses debian, freebsd and openbsd for server OS work, I was also rather surprised recently to see the default web gui that comes on a new fedora install.

https://cockpit-project.org/

	▲	mappu 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I was pleasantly surprised to learn the architecture for this - a minimal backend that does a PAM auth and gives you a shell over websocket, with only your own Linux user credentials - and then everything else (from managing files to apache to VMs) is done in frontend javascript. Keeps the server-side backend minimal and auditable.
	▲	esseph 5 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Also comes default on Red Hat Enterprise Linux, Rocky Linux , AlmaLinux, Oracle Linux, and SUSE. Also walrus from old, old UBNT forum? If so, hello :)

▲

majicDave 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> The concept of a GUI wrapper on top of the Linux ecosystem is what's broken

That is a nugget, it's so true.

Wrappers in general are such an issue in software. Wrappers built on top of wrappers, this desire to abstract everything away makes things look simpler, but every layer slows things down and hides what is actually happening. Every wrapper is another layer of complexity, another hoop to jump through when you're looking for a solution to a problem.

▲

ricardonunez 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Of course is the architecture and the creator of such a thing, isn’t the point of a tool like that for users that don’t have the tech knowledge? I have only used those systems on shared hosting, host providers are the one maintaining and should be keeping them up to date and WHM/Cpnel have plenty of customers to worry too patch holes, if they can’t then who’s fault is it, Architecture, or provider? Hope is the customers fault?

	▲	walrus01 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I would worry less about big shared hosting providers, who have a strong interest in patching their stuff quickly, than the market of people who get one or two dedicated servers or KVM VMs and then install cpanel on them and for the rest of the time they use it, ignore the CLI of the servers and never patch anything. There's a lot of small users of cpanel that have just a few licenses.