Slashdot Mirror
Automatix Kicks Ubuntu into Gear
With the growing amount of talk on the usability of Linux for beginners, there have been quite a few people who have mentioned a script called "Automatix" for Ubuntu as a means of easing the average joe into a life of Linux. Linux.com's (a Slashdot sister site) Tina Gasperson takes a closer look at Automatix and how it could help soften the blow of a Linux switch, at least in the short term. From the article: "Automatix lives up to its reputation. It's worth any time and small frustration it might take to get through the script. And it's even worth that 'over-the-shoulder' time you might spend with a new Linux user to walk them through it. I don't see any reason why a beginner would not be delighted with Ubuntu after a magic touch from Automatix."
It enables the root account, which is generally disabled in Ubuntu. Instead, it uses "sudo", which is useful to restrict root rights and such. By enabling root, it opens up a huge security hole. You can learn more about this at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/RootSudo
That one was fixed.
One thing I really hate, though - if you have not manually set a root password, and boot the machine and select "recovery mode" from the grub menu, it will boot into single user mode and you are root. OS X does this too, IIRC OS X will do this even if you have manually set a root password!
I know, I know, they did it on purpose... still sucks.
Not trying to flame, I love Ubuntu.
I could share files using a Gnutella client or a BitTorrent client; Kino imported my digital video files directly through Firewire; and as a bonus, Automatix even installed OpenOffice.org and Thunderbird.
Ubuntu comes with a BitTorrent client, and OpenOffice.org, and Thunderbird. No script needed.
I don't see the point personally.
By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
I've used it and I have to it's a fantastic script/app!
It installed and configured things like setting up the audio and multimedia codecs, properly setting up amsn(it crashed when i installed it through synaptic) configuring ctrl-alt-del to show the gnome system monitor plus num lock on when gnome starts and eject cd when i click the drive. And Firefox 1.5 install was the really easy!
It made things that I could have accomplished if I searched forums and mailing lists but this made me jump those hurdles and just install the things.
Let me first say that I don't use Automatix, so I do not claim to have much knowledge about what security holes it may or may not have. But your post is BS.
Enabling the root account is "a huge security hole?" I almost never log in as root, but the account is enabled (with a strong password). Did you even read the link you posted? It warns of a few potential downsides to enabling root (as well as a few downsides to not enabling root). Of coarse sudo is better for day to day use, but enabling root is not a "huge security hole".
You have to be trolling.
What do you currently use? Because installing Windows isn't this easy. Both Ubuntu and Fedora are pretty easy to install, with Fedora asking a few more questions but also having a friendly GUI installer. (K)ubuntu's is text only, but still very easy.
"The problem with internet quotations is that many are not genuine" -Abraham Lincoln
This is satire, right? It certainly seems to be a huge "stay the hell away from linux!" warning message.
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
I'm not familiar with the details of automatix, but I lurk quite much in the Ubuntu channels, and it's generally seen as some virus-like script with all kinds of disadvantages and shortcomings.
Or to make it short (from IRC):
[...] !automatix
[ubotu] it has been said that automatix is unsafe, it overwrites configuration files, and does things like "echo -e 'ynYn'" that are considered risky. Please do not use it. There are alternative applications, but it's often best to read the documentation.
Two Worlds - One Sun [Spirit]
Never. The dirty little secret is that people who are into linux like typing in cryptic commands for things. It makes them feel smarter. The goal is to never get out of the 70's and always have a dumb terminal ( as in VT100) feel.
:-)
You will never see that in linux. That's like asking for a sports car manufactuer (Ferrari, etc.) to make a Family Minivan. They just don't want to.
I may be a Troll but I have yet to see any evidence that what I stated isn't true.
Easy Ubuntu's pretty nice as well....
For anyone who doesn't know, since the Slashdot article doesn't even explain what these two programs do, they setup all the restricted/proprietary stuff for the user that Ubuntu can not legally distribute by default like 3d video drivers, mp3 playback and such.
"A truly wise man realizes he knows nothing."
Last I tried out Linux was with a Debian Sarge NetInstall ISO in January 2005, and I tried it on known good and tested hardware (dual Xeon 2.4GHz, 2GB RAM on 533MHz bus, and an Intel mobo, so it's not a total speed demon, but it all "just works" when you plug it in together).
My experience was this:
1) download and burn the ISO
2) insert install CD into new machine and turn it on
3) wonder why it isn't getting a DHCP-ed address and then noticing that the network cable is unplugged. Plug in cable.
4) answer 3 or 4 questions that are amazingly similar to the ones Windows asks during installs
5) wait.
6) wait..
7) wait...
8) after 1.5 hours, have a working and stable Linux box.
Now, if you get the CD through traditional channels, remove #1. Waiting isn't really a step, it's just space between them, so remove #'s 5, 6, and 7. If you have a poster-sized "here's how to plug it in" page (like Dell gives you with a new machine) you won't have the problem in #3. #8 isn't really a step, it's the end, so dump that one too.
That leaves... #2 and #4. Insert CD, answer a few common questions, and at the end of the process, your machine "just works". Now, as a disclaimer: I lack funding for spare hardware to mess with Linux, so I don't have much experience with it. It's just nowhere near as bad as a lot of geeks like to tell people. If you can install Windows, you can install Linux. At least on hardware you know works with Linux "out of the box".
One word. Ubuntu.
For those who read Slashdot regularly, the subject may sound familiar. I was the window user who commented on why the average user DOESN'T switch.
I'm full time Ubuntu at home now.
I have everything working that I had on my windows box. I may have a learning curve when it comes to using new apps, but the point is, I switched almost painlessly.
Hardawre worked out of box? Check
Re-installed all needed software? Check
Printer installed? Check
Kick ass support system in #ubuntu-support? Check
kick ass add/remove program clone? Check
Plays Movies? Check
P2p? Check
Finance software? Check
Remote administration? Check
Virtual Machine Capable? Check
Free Free Free? Check
Best of all is the performance. I've heard that Gnome is slow overall, but man o man, my xp box always BOGGED down after about a year of use to the point I have to reinstall. Hope that doesn't happen with Ubuntu, but in Xp, I was getting "buffer" errors with windows due to too many tcp/ip calls. I had 8 apps that used the internet open. I had mysterious IDE errors with no resolution...I had explorer and svchost issues, Now, I have NO problems and my speeds are incredible.
While it's STILL not ready for primetime for mom and dad (cept for simply browsing...can you believe my wife found firefox, surfed and printed without even knowing I had switched the pc?), I would recommend it for anyone who remembers how to use limited command line options, can follow instructions and who is interested in change.
Sure I had to Sudo apt-get this, and tar xvf that (still don't REALLY know what I'm doing when I use these options, but I'm sure there's a HOWTO when I get a moment) but like I said, I'm HAPPY with ubuntu, the first distro I've found to satisfy my curiosity of Linux and delight me with it's power and ease of use.
This script just makes it LEAPS and BOUNDS simplier than it already is.
Kudo's!
Yo Grark
P.S. Completely separate topic, I'm looking to hire a website developer/programmer to implement a backend to a new e-business, any idea on where to start looking?
Canadian Bred with American Buttering
It's ok to say that "Distro X sucks cause it didn't work for me". Badmouthing volunteers who try to help is not.
* http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=122473
I find that most of the time with windows (even XP) i'm stuck installing drivers, whereas with linux the driver comes with the OS. Windows XP doesn't ship with scanner drivers, because they expect that you have the CD. Linux on the other hand knows that your scanner vendor doesn't ship drivers for linux, so they include them with the OS.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
Easy Ubuntu supports PPC, and is safer to use than Automatix.
Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?
I am a n00b when it comes to Linux.
I've installed Ubuntu a ton of times on relatively ancient computers (p2 233s come to mind) and its always very easy to do, and very easy to get help with from Ubuntu's user forums.
I've more recently tried out Fedora on a couple of higher end comps (I have no $$ for computers so higher end might mean P3 700 )to act as servers to small groups of the Ubuntu comps and really enjoyed that as well.
I think there is a nice feeling to Ubuntu, its labeled, packaged, and branded very well. But, at the same time, I'm a complete Linux newb and I set up Fedora (plus suse just to try it out) and had no more problems with any of them, well actually I didn't have any problems with any of them. After I got used to it a bit more, I prefered working in Fedora to the others.
I think its image more then anything. People don't feel as threatened by Ubuntu. Linux can seem daunting sometimes and Ubuntu has built an image and community to get people past that painlessly. I never got the same impression from the other distros I've tried (not saying there aren't others out there that do this, just not ones I've tried).
In the end I think it comes down to Ubuntu defining their target audience differently then most other distros, and the audience they are (successfully) appealling to is a pretty large one.
1 (short ton / firkin) = 89.1432354 slugs / keg
Automatix is convenient in a newbie, but the fact it uses the --force flag makes me uncomfortable and at times it can cause breakage. So I would recommend if you are comfortable with ubuntu, just install the stuff yourself, but for newbies the pro's can outweight the con's.
I downloaded Automatix and used it to install a few things, but I didn't use their GUI. I just went through the script and manually executed the commands that installed the components I wanted. I heard a lot of things about how Automatix can screw up your system, but this way I knew exactly what it was doing, and it really didn't take that much more effort than the GUI.
I think the best part of Automatix is it's basically an aggregation of procedures to install the most popular non-standard components. Instead of making a google search and spending 15 minutes copying commands from a howto, I can just copy a whole block from the Automatix script. I highly recommend it even if you're experienced with linux. Just give the script a once-over to make sure you're ok with what it's executing.
If you are using Breezy try out Easy Ubuntu http://www.ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=86/ . Installed on about 5 machines with almost no problems.
If you are using Dapper try out BUMPS http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=13888 9&highlight=bumps/. I have a lot of success with this. The author (Ian Alexander) is always soliciting suggestions and has nade quite a few updates in just the last couple of weeks.
My experience is, that the main reason for switching to XP from 2000 is for the familiarity of the users. Apart from not being supported/updated at some point in the near future, there's really no good reasons for a switch to XP.
/ahave
For that reason, I reject the coorporate focus on computer desktop OS's and the focus on what companies want on their computers. It's not a question of security, and if it was a question of compatibility and standards, everyone would be using Apple or Linux.
As I see the twist, the hole coorporative element evolves around what their employees are accustomed to. Whatever a SA wants to run as a server, doesn't depend on their desktop OS's.
Sure point and click works out great on MS server and even better on Apple's, but most SA's uses scripts anyway. So it really doesn't matter what the server OS is.
Ubuntu is a nice step for Linux desktops, and I've switched myself, without being fanatic about it. It just suits my needs better than any other OS's I've tried.
The switch was even easier, with the help of automatix, I could get my daily routines working out of the box, with allmost no prior experience. It's not there yet, but the new version Dapper Drake 6.04(6.06) is even more userfriendly. At the moment you can actually boot the live cd and make a complete installation, while surfing the web, writing emails or whatever you want to to from the live cd, then restart and have a fully working Ubuntu system, dualboot or not.
There's even a script that will install most of the necessary things to get you going called bumps available on ubuntuforums, since automatix doesn't support Dapper. Still got the -force option though.
My point is, if the majority make a switch, the coorporate system will aswell. Theres pro's and con's about everything. It doesn't matter what the OS would be. And I'm pretty sure desktop OS has nothing to do with the choice of any company. If their users don't feel at home using it, they will switch.
Xgl and compiz could be the beginning of a complete new era of graphics on our desktops, and MS/Apple can hardly be expected to keep up with this progress, since so many very skillfull people help maintaining Linux. I've tried Linux many times since 1996 in various distros, but I have never seen such a helpfull community as the ubuntuforums. And I've never seen such a fascinating desktop system, as the combination of Xgl and compiz.
From what I saw on the ubuntu forums, the guy who wrote this has no idea how apt is supposed to work. He's using things like --force-yes in his script....you should NEVER have to do this. It's basically telling apt to shove it and install anyway.....never do that on ANY Debian box unless you know what your doing. As he's asking new users to use this, it should NEVER do things that may break the system. It's not like it's really hard to write the script to do it right even. The biggest reason he used those flags was to avoid having to load the GPG keys in the apt keyring.....apt has this for a REASON! I can understand if it had a pop up and ask you to approve it if there was a BADSIG issue in the repository (there was one this weekend in the Debian sid repository....). Just ignoring it to begin with is VERY bad form.
Gorkman
Wow, I meet a lot of people but I have to say that you are one of the most unpleasant people I have ever have the displeasure to encounter.
For all those newbies out there, try Easy Ubuntu first and save yourself some pain! Save Automatix after you have a little more experience. Trust me, I've installed Ubuntu on 6 boxes so far and Easy Ubuntu is a safer bet.
Automatix :
"It doesn't support Dapper, PPC, or AMD64..."
EasyUbuntu :
"...supporting all the three architectures Ubuntu supports - x86, PPC and AMD64."
Nuff said.
Max.
The next release 6.04 will have a graphical installer - esspresso.