Slashdot Mirror

No, it isn't. It isn't even close. You have new copies of the license files with different inode numbers. And yes, copy protection schemes do break when that happens. Nothing short of a dd-style backup will restore some software to operation.

1. Have you ever tried it? Because I have never heard of a TM restore doing that.

2. Then DO a dd clone! Afterall, dd exists in macOS.

The UI. My sister loves hers, and she can keep it. Mind you, it's pretty long in the tooth now, but still runs just fine, which justifies the premium she paid for it.

Well, it is interesting that there are quite a few KDE themes that emulate OS X, but nobody trying to get KDE (or anything that looks like it) running under OS X. ;-)

And all ya gotta do is launch Terminal, and you can bask in the Shell of your choice. Best of both worlds.

But make no mistake: OS X/macOS is quite serious. BTW, check out the Bill Joy quote at the bottom of that page...

a) "an su." Write it like you'd say it

I've never heard it said ess yoo. I tried to google it but only found threads about sudo. They were split between soodoo and pseudo. No one was arguing for ess-yoo doo or ess-yoo dough. Come to think of it, there are several words like this:

Linux: lin nux, lie nux, lee nux
SQL: sequel, ess cue el /etc: et see, ee tee see, etcetera
Even punctuation has its variants.
More fun reading.

You're right, for setting environment variables permanently you use setx instead. http://ss64.com/nt/setx.html

I learned the DOS command line well in the early nineties, and a surprising amount has stuck with me. I use Windows 10 at work, admin Hyper-V and Linux servers there and run Linux at home 99% of the time. This kind of review looks exactly what I'm looking for but really, since I do much of my work from the command line in both environments, I'm surprised the GUI gets so much focus. It just seems like the hard way most of the time to me.

The first thing I usually do on a Windows machine is pin cmd to the task bar, and from there, right click and run as administrator. I have a c:\bin folder where I stick all the PsTools, Sysinternals, putty/kitty and unix utils tools I need, so I usually

setx PATH "%PATH%;C:\bin\;C:\bin\usr\local\wbin\"

and then custom create a bat file or two to point to my cloud stored resources. All that works on Windows XP - Windows 10 without any special effort.

I started using Windows 10 shortly after it first came out for Windows Insiders. I noticed that some of our proprietary business software doesn't work, but it still doesn't work on Windows 8 either, so that's hardly a surprise. All my command line stuff seems to work without any effort and nearly all my normal software works, the exception being Outlook's search which seems to have been broken in 8 too. (My setup is abnormal enough that I'm not really surprised, just frustrated.) The RSAT took a couple tries to get running, but was working.... until I did a clean install of Win 10 with the official release and now can't get it to work for love or money. (Apparently that's coming out in the next couple weeks and the stuff I was using in Beta won't install in the released version.) Also the Hyper-V manager seems to have a problem with one of our servers now, but I suspect that's a problem on that server rather than with the tool. We don't reboot those things very often, so I'm optimistic the next reboot of that server will resolve the issue.

What I do like in Windows 10 is the improved command line defaults. I didn't really need it, but I like the color options making it easier to spot which command line I'm after and default equivalent to Quick Edit settings so I don't have to remember to do it myself. I'm still getting used to being able to use Ctrl+C on it. I also like the improved snap window (Windows + arrow key) settings, being able to use quarter screens easily and the prompts to choose second windows is quite nice.

I enabled Cortana and the search function improved. I expected to hate it since I only use the search for finding things already on my local computer, but that improved too. I'm not sure I like sharing everything with Microsoft but I share so much already, I'm willing to live with it in exchange for better search responses for now.

You missed the space between "Files" and "(x86)" - try that.

Correct you are, and it was a copy and paste. Here's an odd thing I just went through, it would take the space yet wouldn't save it, so figured using %path% might be a better way, found a great source of Windows Resource kits
  http://ss64.com/links/windows.... yet nothing of value for this.

Going back to the environment variables I find a new variable PATH with two paths taken from the original path and the space left intact for VLC, so did the obvious, searched for the maximum length the path can be (I've never run into it before) https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-... says 256 mine is 346 and helps explain some phantom situations (or not).

Note: To specify an extended-length path, use the "\\?\" prefix. For example, "\\?\D:\very long path". where the max length can be 32,767 characters.

Thank you very much I looked at it a lot and couldn't find an error; akin to the in your face syntax error one keeps missing.

Without your reply, well I'm a bit brighter now path wise. and yes VLC will open now from anywhere.

Thanks again for your reply, now just need to start transferring a few paths for that 256 goal.

Type this into powershell:

(Get-WmiObject Win32_OperatingSystem).Caption

There's your marketing name.

Took about 60 seconds of Googling to not only find this, but to find it in code that was making the same sort of error we're talking about (not literally the number 9). See this: http://ss64.com/ps/get-wmiobje... -- that's using the -match operator which is a regex comparison, and thus inferring whether it's a server build by a mismatch between the marketing name and the build name..

Granted, I don't think powershell existed on Windows 95. I expect it's just wrapping an API that did exist. If it comes right down to it, the registry itself has the versioning information available to anybody who can use ctrl+f in regedit to find the key, and people do indeed do that.

Trust me, MS doesn't give the slightest concern about any broken Java apps.

No, I don't trust that statement in the slightest. Why would you think that? It's very contrary to Microsoft's behaviour in the past.

I have no idea why they chose to name Windows "Windows 10", and I'm not convinced of this, but this is not so implausible as you seem to think.

So you think fsck is something besides a descriptive abbreviation for File System Check?

Dennis Ritchie thought so too:

Dennis Ritchie: “So fsck was originally called something else”
Question: “What was it called?”
Dennis Ritchie: "Well, the second letter was different"
~ Q&A at Usenix

I don't know if he was a pre-teen when he wrote it, but it's a bad name anyway because it doesn't suggest anything to do with the purpose of the tool.

findstr has POSIX basic regular expression support (almost) and has been available since Windows 2000.

I first read that as "ulimitless", which kind of made sense.

not being a fan of the TMFGIFY thing if you google |man cd| you get a link to

http://ss64.com/bash/cd.html

which states
"cd

Change Directory - change the current working directory to a specific Folder.

Syntax
            cd [Options] [Directory]

Key
        -P Do not follow symbolic links
        -L Follow symbolic links (default)

If directory is not given, the value of the HOME shell variable is used.

If the shell variable CDPATH exists, it is used as a search path.
If directory begins with a slash, CDPATH is not used.

If directory is `-', this will change to the previous directory location (equivalent to $OLDPWD )."

but if you don't know this WTF are you doing in a terminal without details instructions??

MoonDimPhotons works on Linux and can generally play web applications designed for the previous version of SilverDimPhotons, as long as they don't use DRM. But Netflix intentionally makes its service incompatible with MoonDimPhotons because a recompiled version of MoonDimPhotons could tee(1) the video into a file that can easily be redistributed to the public in violation of copyright. Linux on PCs and DRM are at fundamental odds with each other.

Then either you A-Researched your ass off before EVERY purchase, B-designed your entire setup around Ubuntu from the start, probably going so far as to buy an Ubuntu system, or C- really should be playing the lotto more, because you sir are one lucky bastard.

As for #2, lets be honest folks: the GUIs in Linux suck. While they look good on the surface if you try sticking to the GUI and ONLY to the GUI in Linux you will quickly find yourself screwed, and I can prove it

I found the GUI on Ubuntu quite nice and easy. Works like Windows pretty much that there was no learning curve. As for the computer I'm using it on, I'm running it on my old Acer 5920G laptop. Read up online on how to dual boot it since it had a seperate HD on it (read how to do that step by step from the desktop). Did that for about 2 months and released that for the 2 months I didn't even load Windows once so I just did a clean install which was a piece of cake. Only thing that doesn't work are the media/play dvd buttons, but never used those anyways

There is a chmod that will remove Bash from user access, yes? Do that. Remove Bash from your access for a single year. I'm willing to bet my last dollar that if you swore off CLI for a year you would have a broken machine in less than 6 months

And again, I'm going to look dumb... what is a chmod and a Bash? chmod isn't explained on http://www.computerhope.com/unix/uchmod.htm well, and Bash isn't explained either on http://ss64.com/bash/. I'm not saying I've had no problems, but none that a quick 'How do I do x on Ubuntu' search on google hasn't fixed with cut and paste commands. I'm not trying to sound like I don't know computers, because I do since I grew up with them. But thing is I know Windows computers, and found that even though Linux is a completely different system, it's not hard (read that it was 10 years ago but that has been really changing). I also understand your argument that CLI really is the most powerful way to do things in Linux, but the same is for Windows with the Dos Prompt, and even Mac OS has it's command prompt (http://ss64.com/osx/) and both of these OS's can more powerfully handled when done through a command prompt and if there users learned how to master these, then it would be better for them. But like many computer things, just because it can be done and learned, doesn't mean it has to be.

I mean, google has all the answers.

http://www.ss64.com/bash/rsync.html

Here is a great reference, with rsync and xxcopy as well.
ss64 robocopy

You should be angry. The feature has been in Linux for years. Stupid Linux hypocrites not getting mad about a feature, just because it is turned off by default. ;-)

Maybe that book will be more useful to you than I thought.
It's a CLI command that is shorthand for "manual", and behaves similar to Windows' HELP command.
Here are some commands you can use it on (or you can click on the command name to see the same info on that site). For example: man ls to find out more about the ls command.

Just use DD it's easy

http://www.ss64.com/bash/dd.html

Catch my general drift, here? What happens if your Windows PC has a bust? You either beat your head against the wall until it's fixed (yes, you have to do that with Linux also) or you pay someone who can fix it for you.

I use Robocopy
http://www.ss64.com/nt/robocopy.html

There's a front end online somewhere but I built my own...

Here's the MS pack it's included in if youre running xp
http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=4544

lots of switches. I just have an external hard drive and
run this once a week
robocopy d:\ x:\ *.* /R:0 /S

That's all these stupid jack-asses can say! "command-line environment! command-line environment! command-line environment!" I could train a parrot to do your job! Windows XP has a command-line environment! Mac OS X has a command-line environment! All flavors of Linux (Ubuntu included) have a command-line environment, as do BSD, Minix, Solaris, Plan Nine from Bell Labs, and every computer that has ever been invented from a mainframe to a digital wristwatch and every computer that will ever be invented for all of eternity! GOD HIMSELF COULD NOT BUILD A COMPUTER WITHOUT A COMMAND LINE ENVIRONMENT, AS HE COULD NOT CONSTRUCT A LIFE FORM THAT DOES NOT EAT, BREATHE, AND REPRODUCE!

Every time you UTTER THE PHRASE "command-line environment" as a liability, you have instantly and irrevocably discredited yourself from all possibility of knowing your ass from a hole in the ground! Next story!

I don't have a single authoritative explanation for you, but this page has some good tips.

Historically, the old FindFast service (now called Indexing Service) was horribly buggy and made Windows PCs run very slow. As a result, standard practice was to disable it (as noted here). I can't say for certain if the same problem exists in Win2K or WinXP, but I still tend to disable the Indexing Service out of habit/superstition.

It *is* poorly designed. That's why everyone knows to set the pagefile to a static size and then reboot and defrag. Then the pagefile ends up on the end of the disk and is never moved again.

Windows boots slow out of the box. Yes, this is true, there's no denying it. However, there are a lot of ways to make it boot faster. Number one, if you're running NTFS you have to disable the last access timestamp (FSUTIL behavior set disablelastaccess 1). Every read it does from the time the NTFS volume is mounted is accompanied by a write to update the last accessed timestamp. This slows boot (and everyday performance) immensely.

Also, go thru services, start/programs/startup, and hklm(hklu)/ms/win/cv/run stuff and stop/disable any unneeded services. For instance, the wireless zero configuration service runs on every default XP SP2 install regardless of whether you have a wireless adapter or not. With the registry and the other config files you can pretty much disable anything you want. I have seen windows boot in under 2 seconds to the login window and another 2 seconds after login to bring up the desktop. If you configure your machine correctly, you'll have a good boot time and it will run more stable because you don't have a bunch of crap hogging ram, threads, i/o and cpu. Also, if you're running a network with DHCP, that slows the boot time a lot (on linux too!) if the os has to wait around for the IP. There are millions of things, but most everything in windows is configurable just like linux. Yeah, you can't recompile the binaries so there's a lot you can't mess with but most of the binaries are totally controlled by the registry (as far as we know).

Good luck,

I immagine it would be, but I'm not sure what all the registry changes you make are. Registry Editor together with a diff tool such as WinDiff from Microsoft Visual Studio or the GNU diff tool run on registry exports made after the install and then again after the changes would give you the details you'd need for the registry changes; you'd simply need a shell script to make the changes to the registry, file permissions, and to any other config files you've changed after the basic install of the OS. This isn't too difficult and is certainly a timesaver compared to doing manual changes to 25+ computers.

http://www.ss64.com/nt/ is a list if the command line tools in NT/XP.

The problem lies in the fact that most labs have a uniform hardware setup. You're almost always better off having a complete install image (and a boot cd to pull it from your network) for in any relitively uniform install enviroment like a lab because it speeds (re)installs greatly. If you are going to make an install image anyway it doesn't make sense to go through the trouble of setting up a post-install script too, you're better off doing it as one step via the image.

I wouldn't bother with a script unless I had to deal with at least 3 or 4 different client setups, and even with that many I might just use the script to generate restore images.

ROBOCOPY

Simple command line robust copy utility. I'm sure you can find the exe file around somewhere. If not, you can download it as part of the Windows 2003 resource kit tools and use the robocop.exe file on any Windows system (it is a standalone exe file, does not require any specific DLL or install files).

Here is short description of its usage.

I'd also be interested if there's any useful tools for managing permissions. Or is that still a mixture of DOS attributes and whatnot that one needs to right-click one's way through the file system/registry/etc. to make effective use of?

CACLS and NTRIGHTS have been around for a while now.

I'd also be interested if there's any useful tools for managing permissions. Or is that still a mixture of DOS attributes and whatnot that one needs to right-click one's way through the file system/registry/etc. to make effective use of?

CACLS and NTRIGHTS have been around for a while now.

...to be dicks and point out in a pedantic but historically and logically incorrect way that GB doesn't mean multiples of 1024 but 1000.
http://www.ss64.com/docs/bytes.html

So according to you, my 300 GB hard drive is really 300 GB even though common sense, the OS, history, and the 512 byte sector argue is isn't.

So c'mon, let your inner dick flap in the wind, along with your jaws. Please. Pretty please.

But first ask IDEMA to make the sectors 4000 bytes in length. Otherwise I'll conclude you are a lead-paint licking (mom's) basement dweller with nothing helpful to say ever. Or possibly someone working for the marketing department of a hard drive manufacturer, which would be worse.

http://www.ss64.com/nt/mountvol.html

But how can the OP search for files and "[zip] and [send] them to a specific folder

dir /S /B c:\*.html > c:\filelist.txt
for /F "delims=" %i in (c:\filelist.txt) do "C:\Program Files\7-Zip\7z.exe" a -tzip c:\myhtmlfiles.zip "%i"
del /s /q c:\filelist.txt

"That seems at least as complex as "man mount ; edit /etc/fstab"."

But a little less complex than....

mountvol /?

ps = process status

Here's a man page for a version of it.

Seconded.

My only "programming" experience was some light VBA, I was able to pick up VBS in no time, mostly using Microsoft's site and help file http://msdn.microsoft.com/scripting/

There are also site's out there with plenty of code ready for use and a buttload of books.

http://www.w3schools.com/vbscript/default.asp
http://www.ss64.com/wsh/functions.html

You don't have to use a GUI - you can use cacls. And I don't see the issue with large amounts of users and groups - assign users to the correct groups, assign the groups the correct file permissions - it's no harder then any other OS. Just because it can get more intricate doesn't mean it can't be simple.

And Linux ACL support is spotty - tools like tar, cpio, pax, and dump don't preserve ACL data. The support also requires a filesystem patch or that you use specific distros (Fedora Core 2 comes to mind). It's also somewhat non-standardised. Not saying it can't be done, but the system used in Windows (which, I believe evolved from VMS ACLs) often works better.

How the heck is a Firewall necessary to keep a default Windows box secure? In other words, if a Windows firewall is there to disallow services (or protocols) from receiving connections from the outside world, then what are these services, and why are they running in the first place?

I understand that by deceiving a user, a malicious service can be started up and listen on the internet, and become a vector for infecting your machine. But that requires an act of the user. If I NEVER enable any special services on my machine, than only the default services are running, and they must somehow be allowing malware to install, right? So, why aren't these services fixed, or disabled by default?

Finally, if these servies are necessary to the proper running of my machine, then when I use them the Windows firewall software will ask if I do not want to block that port, service, etc. Once that occurs, am I not just as unprotected as if I never used the firewall software? How does it really help?

So, that's a lot of questions, but I would appreciate an explanation. Are the attacks on windows solely due to users running malware directly, or are there vectors by which, without any user action (ie. no browsing w/ ActiveX controls, no javascript, no running malicious executables, no starting email attachments, etc) the machine can get infected anyway? If so, what are those services? It's not like a Windows machine, by default, needs to have an email/web/network disk/instant messaging service running, so why does it?

NOTE - I googled "insecure windows services" and got some info; indeed windows does have a bunch of services open to the world by default (un-f'ing believable). Can anyone say which ones are primarily allowing machines to become zombies?

http://www.ss64.com/ntsyntax/services.html

[humming]Feedin' the troll, la de dee dee[/humming]

Can you rotate, resize and compress a JPEG, GIF or PNG on the MS$ command line? Can you do this ssh user@domain.com. Can you run a firewall script from the cmd? Can you chmod or chown?

I dunno if it's just me, but did anyone notice that none of those things have anything to do with the shell? (Well, except maybe chmod and chown - if you push it.)

Image manipulation? Just launch ImageMagick. You can do this in Windows right now, with the correct software installed.

SSH? Just launch SSH. You can do this in Windows right now, with the correct software installed.

A firewall? Launch your firewall script. You can do this in Windows right now, with the correct software installed.

Are we seeing a pattern? 100% of the relevant stuff you mentioned doesn't involve the shell, and relies on external apps. As for chmod and chown, apart from the fact that you can install them in Windows (with cygwin), they're totally irrelevant - Windows has a much more complete permissions system then your average *nix, and it has the command line tools to support it in 'cacls'.

The day I can boot Windows to the command line and strip it down to its kernel, only implementing the services I want, I will know that MS$ has finally stolen everything from Linux. MS$ is crap, It will always be crap. Putting a dress on a pig won't make it pretty - unless your another pig!

Sure. You whine about how you can't do certain things in Windows, things which are as easy to achieve as in your *nix, then you turn around and whine that if you could do them, Microsoft would be stealing.

How does supply and demand work in your world?

Robocopy's a good alternative to rsync if you're after basic capabilities and only running Windows (and don't need compatibility with an rsync server). It's in the Resource Kit - 99% sure that the 2003 RK version is backwards-compatible so go for that one (as you can download the 2003 RK rather than having to order a CD for the 2000 one). More here:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?Fa milyID=9d467a69-57ff-4ae7-96ee-b18c4790cffd&displa ylang=en
http://www.ss64.com/nt/robocopy.html
http://www.windowsitpro.com/Articles/Print.cfm?Art icleID=39119

Like these?

On windows XP there's a command line tool called 'shutdown', which will shut down the computer. It can even be used to remotely shut down another computer on the network.

In earlier versions of windows nt, this tool was part of a ressource kit, but in windows xp it is bundled with the OS itself.

See http://www.ss64.com/nt/shutdown.html for more information.

Alternatively, if you're using any NT derivative (4 and up), you can schedule a task to use Robocopy (from the Windows Resource Kits) to mirror data to remote shares.

Here: RoboCopy
Usage: RoboCopy

Instead of xcopy, try RoboCopy, included in the windows NT/2k/xp/2k3 resource kit available here. It gives you almost as much control as rsync, including directory synchronization, touch control, ageing, network failure support, and others. I use this at work to move around copies of live production data to backup servers located offsite via vpn without any issues. More information on syntax can be found here.

To everyone who has had something useful to say, thank you. Your suggestions are what I was looking for. I have found a few resources in my own searching's, but felt that having the eyes and minds of the /. crowd helping would yield far greater results.

As for the rest of you: I have long wondered how many /.'ers were real sysadmins and hackers and who wasn't. Thank you for removing all doubt I may have had about your status.

Several of you have tried to make an argument that I am under qualified for the job I've taken. I read over my submission again, and at no point do I say "I've never seen one of these new-fangled Windows machines before". My specialty has been with implementing Linux solutions to Windows networks via Samba. I have a fair grasp of Windows technologies and am quite comfortable in said environment. However, it would be foolhardy to assume that I know all there is to know about Redmond's offering.

It is made clear to me by your statements that either you are wishful thinkers straining to install Corel's distro or that you haven't the self motivation necessary to stay competitive in this field. To the later, I look forward to cleaning up your network once you've been dismissed.

I realize this is a bit off topic, but I felt that it would be unfair to those in similar straits watching if I didn't address these comments. Now, as promised, the links which I have found most useful.

• http://www.ss64.com - A helpful listing and translation of Windows NT, BASH and Oracle commands.
• http://isg.ee.ethz.ch/tools/realmen/index.en.html - Real Men Don't Click is a site by "a merry band of system managers from the Department of Electrical Engineering at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology" and catalogues their efforts to manage a Win2K network with Linux know-how.

I'm just a sparetime programmer, who's grown up with GUI so commandlines ain't my thing, but why should that stop me from taking a stab at it? *g*

The easy one, counting lines in files:
'for /R %a in (*.txt) do @find /v /c "" %a'

Multiple file search-replace is a bit tougher straight up, I guess. However, it seems munge from the reskit could be usefull. I don't have it, as I'm no sysadmin, so I'm not sure if the large file bug is fixed in the later packs.

Process killing: Interesting one. I couldn't start to find a solution since I don't have the reskit at hand, but I'd love to check out ptree.

Of course, with a specific util or two, all of these tasks are rather trivial. Is there anything specific keeping you from using 3rd party utils?