Slashdot Mirror


Ubuntu 15.04 Received Well By Linux Community

jones_supa writes: Canonical released Ubuntu 15.04 a couple of weeks ago, and it seems that this release has been a success. The community is mostly reporting a nice experience, which is important since this is the first Ubuntu release that uses systemd instead of upstart. At Slashdot, people have been very nervous about systemd, and last year it was even asked to say something nice about it. To be fair, Ubuntu 15.04 hasn't changed all that much. Some minor visual changes have been implemented, along with a couple of new features, but the operating system has remained pretty much the same. Most importantly it is stable, fast, and it lacks the usual problems accompanied by new releases.

300 comments

  1. Rock solid so far - really like it by Big_Breaker · · Score: 1

    I'm on Kubuntu 15.04, NUC with intel graphics. Everything just works including suspend right out of the gate. Love it.

    1. Re:Rock solid so far - really like it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This update broke a number of things, and killed an important kernel module as well. Had to roll back to 14.04 Xubuntu, where I should have left it in the first place.

    2. Re:Rock solid so far - really like it by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      Kubuntu 15.04 is a broken mess because of the jump to Plasma 5, which is nowhere near ready. Kate is the worst. Opening 2 files in Kate caused Dolphin to freeze until I looked up a hacky workaround. And then Kate still can't edit FTP files, which is a known bug for many months which there seem to be no plans to fix. Plasma crashes several times a day now too.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    3. Re:Rock solid so far - really like it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      15.04 and dumb system role out. Broke 4 required software packages, because they did not build in a map feature of older tech to newer tech. It upgrades a stomps on services, not warning it is going to break anything. No offer to fix anything. At least Microsoft understands and gives warnings.

      It was SO BROKEN that apt-get failed. had to many dpkg and manually removing files to get a even stable release.

      I was forced into the update because of 14.04 issues, and the only way to fix it was upgrade. What a joke.

      At least the iPhone interface IS STILL BROKEN!

      Do these SYSTEMD people have real jobs? Actually have to give customer service and test for smooth upgrades?

      ARGH!!@

    4. Re:Rock solid so far - really like it by Eunuchswear · · Score: 2

      It's like you read all the "how to make a good bug report" articles and decided to do the opposite.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    5. Re:Rock solid so far - really like it by Richard+Dick+Head · · Score: 1

      Nothing new, Kubuntu has always been a broken mess. Which is due in part to KDE being a perpetually broken mess. The last time I used a properly-integrated KDE-based distro with no annoying bugs was Mandrake Linux 10.1.

      Its a bummer. KDE was my favorite desktop since I've always had a reasonably powerful machine.

    6. Re:Rock solid so far - really like it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kubuntu 15.04 is a broken mess because of the jump to Plasma 5, which is nowhere near ready. Kate is the worst. Opening 2 files in Kate caused Dolphin to freeze until I looked up a hacky workaround. And then Kate still can't edit FTP files, which is a known bug for many months which there seem to be no plans to fix. Plasma crashes several times a day now too.

      AMEN! I REALLY wish I hadn't "upgraded" from 14.10 to 15.04. :(

    7. Re:Rock solid so far - really like it by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      The last couple years of Kubuntu have been kind to me, before 15.04. I do recall similar messes when they switched to KDE 4 though.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    8. Re:Rock solid so far - really like it by Windwraith · · Score: 1

      Personally speaking, it wasn't this bad when the switch to KDE4 happened.
      Since KDE4 was a bit of a completely new thing, introduced a large number of new components, toys and apps, and allowed certain things to be done that I don't recall possible in KDE3, moving to it was somehow not so bad, you didn't have "similar settings" to carry on. It was a completely new thing. However, Plasma 5 (I don't even know if it's right to call it "KDE5", with the whole frameworks stuff...), is supposed to be more or less a refactor and a port to Qt5, but removing a lot of previous customizations, plasmoids and options that were there before. You can't even set your clock to 24-hour format now. It's quite bizarre. What happened there?

      To be frank, I have been preparing for the inevitable moment I'd have to leave KDE since the whole "frameworks" thing. KDE is great, but it feels like something is wrong with it. There's not much third-party software for KDE4, and practically none for "KDE5", most bugs reported end up WONTFIX or ignored, Planet KDE is strangely disjointed and weird to read with the actual talk about KDE being only spurred by a few posts (like the ones from the kwin devs) and nothing else; OpenDesktop's kde-look and kde-apps are full of outdated or abandoned third-party software and plasmoids, or apps that are just written in Qt and are pretty much desktop-independent that just happen to be cataloged as "KDE app", and khotnewstuff has problems installing some of those due to how loosely organized the thing is. I keep getting the impression that the only people writing extensions to the KDE desktop only do so as pet test projects that will never go beyond "proof of concept" stage, or go abandoned quickly because the developer switched to Gnome or Unity or XFCE or so, or are just marked "KDE" because they happen to be written in Qt. And almost no one of the apps with plugin support has any third-party plugin for them.

      Sure, I am in love with some of the apps that I still use, like Konsole, Krusader, Krita, Ksnapshot...and I think Kwin is the best window manager there is, full of options and adaptable to all uses (and very friendly with gaming/gamedev as you can suspend compositing anytime), but I can't shake this feeling that it's not going to last and we'll have to migrate elsewhere.

      I digress. For now, I just hope it gets back to a "production-ready" state soon and that Krusader gets ported. I can live with the changes as long as I don't lose that file manager. Can't find a replacement anywhere, no one with decent integrated text editor (other than midnight commander...also, while external text editors are okay, the integrated one has the advantage of launching instantly), image viewer in a simple pane, easy-to-maintain actions, customizable toolbar, archive browser (although rar support is broken now...), and quick filtering (showing only files that match a given pattern), as well as the option to forget selection when explicitly clicking on a single file. The closest I found was one named Sunflower, but still lacking some of those features. I should ask Slashdot.

  2. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by jbssm · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Congratulations for specifically missing the entire point of the article.

  3. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by gstoddart · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Honestly though, you're clearly not who Ubuntu us going after.

    I'm running 14.something in a VM because I was curious about it.

    As far as I can tell, there is no root account I could log into directly, the system seems to be set up to cater to desktop users who don't know or care what systemd and gnome 3 even are.

    It seems a decent enough desktop platform, but I'd hardly call it a nerd hobbyists platform.

    In which case, chances are the people who this is targeted at simply don't care about the collective nerd angst about how Ubuntu isn't pure enough, or geeky enough.

    This sounds like complaining that building blocks don't adhere to the best practices of structural engineering. It's kind of missing the point.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  4. The SystemD marketing rolls on... by MachineShedFred · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've never seen so much evangelizing about a particular subsystem change in Linux before, which makes me think that unlike other past changes, this one needs it rather than having it's own benefits do the selling...

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    1. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by gweihir · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Right on the mark. Only something with major rot in it needs this kind of marketing.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    2. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Skarjak · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I would argue that the marketing is needed because of all the (in my opinion, completely unjustified) hate that systemd gets. Let's not forget Arch users have been happily using systemd for a long time now, so the prophecies of end times coming with systemd seem a bit exaggerated.

    3. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by ckatko · · Score: 3, Funny

      On the other hand, it looks like people are finally getting bored discussing it. So even if Ubuntu is getting worse, the Slashdot discussions are getting better!

    4. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only something with major rot in it needs this kind of marketing.

      Or something written by the NSA. Has systemd been audited for backdoors?

    5. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by SilenceBE · · Score: 3

      To be honest the only people marketing SystemD to me were those who in every article shared their anti SystemD feelings. It`s the first time that I had so much attention for a linux subsystem because of all the doom and gloom that was going on.

    6. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and you are a pedantic asshat. Now that we've got that sorted, the grown-ups would like to talk.

    7. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by _xeno_ · · Score: 2

      Meh, in this case, systemd might be an improvement.

      Remember that several years ago Ubuntu switched away from SysV init to Upstart, which was effectively their own version of systemd.

      So really the change is that they've gone from crappy in-house systemd to crappy actual systemd.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
    8. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by mlts · · Score: 2

      SystemD, (and to a lesser extent FirewallD) have their points... but as anything in IT, it is good to at least learn the basics of them in order to get around, just like one has to learn how to use SELinux and not just disable it completely.

      I personally am on the fence... SystemD provides a lot of functionality, especially with just one command (systemctl). However, I will have a lot more faith in this new functionality once the code certification and auditing is complete.

    9. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, he's almost as much of a moron as the morons who reply to different comments.
      Seriously, how hard is it to click on the right "Reply to This" link?
      Thank god he's not THAT big a moron.

    10. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've never seen so much evangelizing about a particular subsystem change in Linux before, which makes me think that unlike other past changes, this one needs it rather than having it's own benefits do the selling...

      These articles are not evangelizing, they are clickbaiting losers like you who think it's the end of the world in order to get money from the ad impressions.

    11. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What I found interesting is that people keep using Linux despite the massive ranting about various components. Maybe the free price of Linux is still so attractive.

    12. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Marginal+Coward · · Score: 1

      I've never seen so much evangelizing about a particular subsystem change in Linux before, which makes me think that unlike other past changes, this one needs it rather than having it's own benefits do the selling...

      Or, as Shakespeare put it, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."

    13. Re: The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SystemD-:

    14. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Dwedit · · Score: 2

      SystemD seems to be really nice, when I tested out Debian Jessie, it booted so much faster than what was there before. These kind of things leave a good first impression.

    15. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by CauseBy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      cf. "If vaccination is so good, then why do doctors have to tell me to get vaccinated?"

    16. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by mean+pun · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I've never seen so much evangelizing about a particular subsystem change in Linux before, which makes me think that unlike other past changes, this one needs it rather than having it's own benefits do the selling...

      The incessant whining about systemd in the last few years here on /. has been deafening. So if a major distribution then switches to systemd, and the world is not coming to an end, that's news for (this particular bunch of) nerds, no?

      I realise that for some people here it is not welcome news, but news it is.

    17. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Theres an old saying, which Im going to modify for my own purposes.

      Those who can, make distros. Those who cant, whine endlessly about what the distros are doing.

    18. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Megol · · Score: 0

      Strawman...

    19. Re: The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure; just search NSA.gov for the results. Check out the SELinux modules while you're there.

    20. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      except, you know, for the part where upstart predates systemd by 4 years.

    21. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by armanox · · Score: 1

      Maybe. Or maybe some of us are moving away from Linux because of too many "my way or the highway" type developers and unfinished crap getting shoved down people's throats. *BSD and Solaris 11 run just fine on my laptop (and my home servers are Solaris 10 and IRIX).

      --
      I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
    22. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *BSD and Solaris 11 run just fine on my laptop (and my home servers are Solaris 10 and IRIX).

      Nice choices. :) Those operating systems still have the professional UNIX feel in them.

    23. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by cb88 · · Score: 2

      Acutally a bunch of Arch users left... when systemd was rolled out alot went to Gentoo a derivative of it as it seems to be one of the last holdouts against systemd. Gentoo is about choice though and there are alot of people running systemd even on Gentoo. and friends.

    24. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The word "protest" meant "promise." The lady in question was promising fidelity to her husband, and Hamlet's mother thought that was too big of a promise to keep. The modern usage is stupid. Similarly, systemd criticism is mostly of the ignorant variety. There's a shitload of mudslinging from people who think the entire point of Unix is writing shell scripts. For some reason bash is Unix but C is not.

    25. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If by faster, you mean slower then I agree. Our Debian servers now take nearly an hour to reboot after upgrading to that systemd garbage. Also, since systemd swallows stderr and sometimes syslog messages, it is nearly impossible to troubleshoot why it is so unreliable and slow.

    26. Re: The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Brrrrrr, wrong, try again.

      The whole point of Unix is to do one thing and do it well.

    27. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The correction is not important to the discussion, nor constructive. You wanted to incite a response that was neither. Seems perfectly reasonable. -1 for a continuation.

    28. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've never seen so much evangelizing about a particular subsystem change in Linux before, which makes me think that unlike other past changes, this one needs it rather than having it's own benefits do the selling...

      What a stupid way to gauge a technology. If you ask ViM users then Emacs is a technical wasteland of bloat. And if you ask Emacs users then ViM pollutes you rmind with "modes."

    29. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have been using it for about a week.

      Several startup issues (my own fault). But they were semi painful to debug. As a few things have moved around.

      However, I have noticed my reboot times have gone from 30-60 seconds to under 5-15. In fact one of the issues I had to debug was why a usb drive was not mounting properly (usb mount was happening before the usb system was setup). Still have not nailed it down yet. But have moved things around a little bit and now things are working most of the time (1 out 4 boots fails). At this point it seems more like a kernel thing than a startup issue. It probably was always there but masked by the slow bootup.

    30. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      system is end of days. No good customer service would release a product, that directly replaces a product, that CANNOT support calls to old product.

      Hell EXCEL is still using LOTUS naming style.
      WINDOWS is still DOS programs. Try creating a directory with a name of CON, LPT, ...

      YES, I love to hate MS, but systemd nerds do no understand consistency is needed! It is not just giving the NEXT GREAT SOFTWARE, it is also bring the all along in a smooth and orderly manor.

    31. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Theres an old saying, which Im going to modify for my own purposes.

      Those who can, make distros. Those who cant, whine endlessly about what the distros are doing.

      I make my own distribution using Linux From Scratch (LFS) as the basis. Yet I do not think SystemD is a worthy replacement for SysVinit. No log file should ever be binary. Period. Full stop.

    32. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Relax a bit. :)

    33. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by devent · · Score: 1

      A lot of users left, really? Lets see on Distrowatch.com
      2010 9. Arch 768
      2011 6. Arch 1134
      2012 7. Arch 1201 systemd was introduced
      2013 9. Arch 1016
      2014 7. Arch 1087
      Now 9. Arch 924, with Ubuntu, Debian, Mint and openSUSE on top, probably because of the new releases. All with systemd.
      --
      2012 22. Gentoo 466
      Now 40. Gentoo 313
      As far as I can tell, Arch gained popularity for the systemd change, and stood on top through the years, while Gentoo lost a lot of popularity.

      --
      http://www.mueller-public.de - My site http://www.anr-institute.com/ - Advanced Natural Research Institute
    34. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's hilarious given that both *BSD and Solaris have always been "my way or the highway" operating systems. They only support what they ship as their OS, nothing more, and they all tap directly into any system functionality they have, just like systemd works directly against Linux functionailty.

      So please leave and take your irrationality with you.

    35. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Eponymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      understand consistency is needed

      Of course one could also cite many companies that aren't afraid to aggressively move forward. Apple is the best example.

      Sometimes backwards compatibility just isn't worth the cost.

    36. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've never seen so much evangelizing about a particular subsystem change in Linux before, which makes me think that unlike other past changes, this one needs it rather than having it's own benefits do the selling...

      Nah. Slashdot just likes to stir the pot every week to get desperately-needed hits. systemd became boring months ago.

    37. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      A lot of users left, really? Lets see on Distrowatch.com...
      As far as I can tell, Arch gained popularity for the systemd change, and stood on top through the years, while Gentoo lost a lot of popularity.

      I wouldn't read too much into Gentoo stats on distrowatch. First, I doubt many Gentoo users visit the website. Second, even if they did I don't know how Distrowatch would know since Gentoo doesn't advertise itself in all of its USER_AGENT strings. Gentoo generally has avoided self-promotion.

    38. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      Uh, you do know that systemd is largely backwards compatible with sysvinit, runs the same init.d files and so on.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    39. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      Yipee! The lunatic troll is back!

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    40. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gentoo a derivative of it

      Uh, wow.

      They're actually about the same age, but I'd never heard of Arch until years after Gentoo was somewhat popular.

    41. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by ookaze · · Score: 1

      Theres an old saying, which Im going to modify for my own purposes.

      Those who can, make distros. Those who cant, whine endlessly about what the distros are doing.

      I make my own distribution using Linux From Scratch (LFS) as the basis. Yet I do not think SystemD is a worthy replacement for SysVinit. No log file should ever be binary. Period. Full stop.

      I'm doing that too, all my systems are made from scratch with an automated tool based on nALFS that I maintain alone.
      I use systemd since before it was even officially released and have never looked back since. I abandoned shitty sysvinit 15+ years ago on my systems and never looked back.
      You don't even understand what the journal is doing, I won't debate this nonsense while on all my servers, I have the journal plus text log files via rsyslog.
      If you can't even do that and yet you claim to use LFS, I bet you didn't understand one thing of what you were doing, which defeats the purpose of using LFS.

    42. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would argue that the hate is needed because of all the (in my opinion, completely unjustified) marketing that systemd gets.

    43. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) Many people on the ubuntu forums switched to arch after unity and other mess
      2) The arch wiki is pretty popular in the GNU/Linux world
      3) and arch users are generally pretty vocal about it (as shown by 1) with signatures, avatars)

      As for gentoo, why would a gentoo user go to distrowatch?

    44. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, it looks like people are finally getting bored discussing it. So even if Ubuntu is getting worse, the Slashdot discussions are getting better!

      There's little point discussing it once it has already happened, unless you enjoy flagellation of deceased equines.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    45. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Idiot. Someone with half a clue would explain why they think there's a strawman in there.

    46. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's an old saying that I'm going to modify:

      Stupid is as stupid does, and boy, you done stupid.

      Why?

      Because you just said that those who can write their own kernel do, and those who can't whine about it.

      Right now, you're not writing your own kernel but whining about others who just want to use their computer without fighting it.

      Grow the fuck up.

    47. Re: The SystemD marketing rolls on... by gweihir · · Score: 2

      It would be very hard to hide backdoors in SELinux. The only thing they could do there is making the configuration interface complicated enough that many people will make mistakes. And they have done that beautifully. Same way IPSec was sabotaged. Come to think of it, that strategy is at least in part what makes systemd highly problematic.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    48. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Skarjak · · Score: 1

      This is the problem right here. The majority of criticism is coming from people who have not actually spent any time trying to learn systemd. Some experienced users might have valid criticism, but most of it is uninformed.

    49. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by armanox · · Score: 1

      Except we know exactly to expect from Sun/Oracle, the OpenIndiana folks, the FreeBSD, and the OpenBSD folks. Linux devs randomly decide they're going to replace something and call everyone who might who questions them an idiot. And guess what? Red Hat, Debian, and Canonical only support what they ship with their OS as well. You know what we don't have in the other groups? Random splintering and decisions designed to fracture the community.

      --
      I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
    50. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, Sun/Oracle never replaced anything. Imagine what a scandal it would cause if they replaced init with a systemd-like setup and maybe called it SMF. Or removed your ability to use UFS as your root file system and FORCED you to use ZFS. Or, horror of horrors, changed the networking commands and made you start using some alien tool called 'ipadm' instead of your trusted-and-true, rooted-in-unix-philosophy 'ifconfig' command.

    51. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would argue that the marketing is needed because of all the (in my opinion, completely unjustified) hate that systemd gets.

      You've got the cart before the horse. The marketing was and is incessant (spammed everywhere), dishonest (claiming all sorts of lies about the competition) and technically content free. I'm all for a fast boot but their bad behavior really earned them the hatred. Particularly after similar nonsense with Wayland which had everybody on edge.

    52. Re:The SystemD marketing rolls on... by Megol · · Score: 1

      Yes you are. It should be plainly obvious why it is a strawman but for you: the idea that reboots aren't important.
      Or perhaps this is clearer: You aren't the world, for some uses reboot time can be critical (though those systems normally use specialized operating systems), for a kernel developer reboot time may be a bottleneck, some people prefer to shut down a computer rather than use hibernation, a huge amount of people uses notebook computers and those aren't designed to be always on.

  5. Wow.. by red+crab · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A Softpedia article gets linked to Slashdot story these days; can Slash-vertisement get any lower than this?

  6. Who is this 'community'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And what does he do?

    1. Re:Who is this 'community'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's interesting how users of open source form some kind of "community" (the "open source community") but no one talks about "closed source community".

  7. In before Unity bashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    A friendly reminder that if you hate Unity, Ubuntu also supports KDE, Xfce, LXDE, Enlightenment, Cinnamon, GNOME Shell, MATE, and the CLI.

  8. Goes to sleep every 30 seconds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My older laptops don't like it at all, every 30 seconds Ubuntu 15.04 goes to sleep (no matter what settings are changed) making them unusable and I've not found a cure at all for this behavior. Rolled back to 14.10.

  9. A year later by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's been a year. All those who don't want systemd realized the only option was to leave the linux community and go elsewhere (BSD being the popular option). Thus those who are left are part of a systemd echo-chamber and, unsurprisingly, it's being well received by those members of the community (left).

    1. Re:A year later by gweihir · · Score: 0, Troll

      Don't think so. I am not going to let the systemd cancer on my systems, but I am not going to run Ubuntu either. Many of those not liking systemd are in the higher competence class and/or run things like Debian on servers. An Ubuntu-release is not going to reach most of these people at all.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    2. Re:A year later by r_a_trip · · Score: 0

      Seems to me like a problem solved. Everybody happy.

      --
      # touch universe # chmod +rwx universe # ./universe
    3. Re:A year later by davydagger · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Many of those not liking systemd are in the higher competence class

      in your dreams. If you where you'd make a non-systemd distro that doesn't suck. Most of you who hate systemd are loudmouths who aren't half as compitant as you think you are, because 90% of your anti-systemd complaints are entirely unfounded. First rate conspitard grade crap.

    4. Re:A year later by LordLimecat · · Score: 2

      Many of those not liking systemd are in the higher competence class and/or run things like Debian on servers

      Except for, you know, the RedHat and Debian developers who included systemd?

    5. Re:A year later by Megol · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Given the (almost exclusive) emotional appeal that anti-systemd people tend to use I wouldn't place them in the "higher competence class". Wannabes and script kiddies is a better classification.

      There are a lot to criticize in systemd (as in all subsystems) but "it doesn't follow a mythological philosophy" isn't one of those. Nor is the commonly repeated _erroneous_ claims that is popular.

    6. Re:A year later by gweihir · · Score: 2

      Nice inversion. The emotional appeals come from the pro-systemd people, valid technical arguments on that side are nowhere to be found.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    7. Re:A year later by gweihir · · Score: 1

      That tired old lie again...

      Making a distro is not something a single person can do. And if you were not intent on spreading lies, you would acknowledge that as it is rather obvious.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    8. Re:A year later by gweihir · · Score: 2

      You mean the whole 5 people on the technical committee that voted it in? Or the less than 10 people that maintain it?

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    9. Re:A year later by advocate_one · · Score: 1

      hmmm if you can do better, then do it with your own distro and bandwidth... until then shut the fsck up...

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    10. Re:A year later by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      Actually, a lot of distros are made by a single person. My mid-'00s favorite MEPIS, for example, was a one person project at the time.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    11. Re:A year later by armanox · · Score: 1

      But not anymore. Even Slackware has helpers, with Patrick getting the final say.

      --
      I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
    12. Re:A year later by armanox · · Score: 2

      You mean like RH prior to RHEL 7? Or how about Slackware? Gentoo? Ubuntu LTS? Plenty of distros exist[ed] without systemd and didn't suck. What Red Hat and the systemd crowd doesn't want to here is that most users that care do not want systemd. Most users have no opinion one way or another. Most that do care were perfectly content with the old system and saw much bigger problems in the Linux world that fighting over replacing init takes time away from. If we really needed a new init system, then why not adopt launchd, SMF (which systemd wishes it was), or upstart, and focus on issues that actually matter? Instead, Linux is losing long time supporters and is fracturing itself.

      --
      I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
    13. Re:A year later by Phreakiture · · Score: 1

      Actually, that's not quite true.

      Some of us don't give a rat's ass and are tired of the topic.

      --
      www.wavefront-av.com
    14. Re:A year later by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are too many distros considering they just copy an existing packaging system and change the UI in very minor ways. More flexible themes would suffice.

    15. Re:A year later by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That I do not have the capabilities to build a ford pinto in my garage does not mean I have to pretend it wasn't a piece of shit or make one myself to earn some privilege about complaining they were dangerous pieces of shit.

      Your very assumptions are a fallacy.

    16. Re:A year later by ookaze · · Score: 1

      That tired old lie again...

      Making a distro is not something a single person can do. And if you were not intent on spreading lies, you would acknowledge that as it is rather obvious.

      You're plain wrong. If you count LFS as a distro, then I have made a distro as a single person, as I made my own more than a decade ago and that's the one I use at home since then. It's used for all the family to use, several computers in the house, on my embedded ones, on my MythTV one, on my firewalls, ...
      The only big difference is that I don't maintain it for other people.
      This is where most of the hard, boring and tedious work is, and I don't want to do that, especially when I see how distro makers are treated here or elsewhere.
      Lots of people asked me why I don't release my OS as a distro. This is the reason, and I can add the fact that it surely would be duplicate with one from other people who are knowledgeable enough to do exactly the same thing that I'm doing.

    17. Re:A year later by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Argh, Gnome themes are the suck. Because no single theme defines all properties you get different visual results depending on the order you've chosen themes.

    18. Re:A year later by ookaze · · Score: 1

      You mean like RH prior to RHEL 7? Or how about Slackware? Gentoo? Ubuntu LTS? Plenty of distros exist[ed] without systemd and didn't suck. What Red Hat and the systemd crowd doesn't want to here is that most users that care do not want systemd. Most users have no opinion one way or another. Most that do care were perfectly content with the old system and saw much bigger problems in the Linux world that fighting over replacing init takes time away from. If we really needed a new init system, then why not adopt launchd, SMF (which systemd wishes it was), or upstart, and focus on issues that actually matter? Instead, Linux is losing long time supporters and is fracturing itself.

      But you're wrong plain and simple.
      sysvinit and its shell scripts was one of the reasons I decided to make my own distro from upstream sources 15+ years ago.
      I saw already that these things were security nightmares added to the fact that they were buggy and impossible to fix in the cases where design flaws were involved.
      To this day, they are full of kludges and nonsense, and proprietary software vendors are no better than a newbie sysadmin as to their knowledge of init scripts.
      Everything I've seen was full of bugs or made for the most simple case.
      I think that's why LVM was so badly supported in most distro, except in Red Hat ones, as RH employees develop LVM2.
      And I say that because I mastered init scripts, I corrected countless ones on distros. But I could never do anything about its design flaws, and had to just shake my head when I saw sysadmins launching them directly when the scripts weren't cleaning their environment correctly (which they can't do properly anyway) and they got different bad results, like believing a daemon was launched because the script said so, but the daemon wasn't launched at all.
      People that say init scripts were working correctly, I just can't take them seriously, init scripts never worked correctly in the first place, unless you knew what you were doing and mastered everything about a session and its environment, and lots of other things.

      I'm no genius to have seen all the flaws in sysvinit, lots of people saw them and tackled the problem, and I often used their solution, I've went years with simpleinit-msb (after using simpleinit), which I had to support (patch) myself when it was abandoned until it was too hard and when I went searching for a better one, I first tried Upstart, which was a PITA, then systemd appeared and I never looked back.
      None of the init solutions I've tried along the years gained traction. Even systemd at first, the inertia was too strong. I thought it was sad, but at least I didn't have to deal with sysvinit crap at home.

    19. Re:A year later by ookaze · · Score: 1

      Nice inversion. The emotional appeals come from the pro-systemd people, valid technical arguments on that side are nowhere to be found.

      Anyway, systemd won, and I can now enjoy seeing all the incompetent fools that were against systemd be proven as truely incompetent fools as time goes by and systemd just chugs along without the mythical problems they were talking about but never explained (as they don't exist).

    20. Re:A year later by gweihir · · Score: 1

      That tired old lie again. Building a distro is a lot of work and far more than any one person can do today. The disingenuity of the systemd cult is staggering.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    21. Re:A year later by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Excellent example.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    22. Re:A year later by gweihir · · Score: 0

      15 years ago, it was possible. Not anymore. And even 15 years ago, it took quite a bit of time and work. I will look into contributing to Devuan or Gentoo when that becomes the only viable options to remain systemd-free.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    23. Re:A year later by gweihir · · Score: 2

      So you have created a customized for for yourself? In what way does that qualify as a "distro"? Oh, right, it does not.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    24. Re:A year later by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Give it a few years. And then you will have to eat your words. Or you would if you had any level of honesty and integrity.

      And no, systemd has not "won" at all.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    25. Re:A year later by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      systemd is bad because it reduces shutdown time by quickly sending the SIGKILL signal instead of waiting for the programs to properly shutdown on their own. It takes risky shortcuts in an attempt to improve its marketing image while damaging the underlying stability and reliability of the OS. The fast shutdown signal prevents programs from properly closing and potentially leads to data loss and corruption. I have lots of tabs open so Firefox takes a few moments to exit. Unlike previous OSes including Windows where I could hit the power button and everything would cleanly shutdown, now if I hit the power button half of my programs can't close fast enough. When they're started again, they all show their "was not shutdown properly" messages. This demonstrates they all had some amount of data loss.

      That's a technical argument not an emotional one. Please explain to me why reducing the kill time to save a couple seconds is worth risking data loss on every shutdown? The choice was made on purpose, so I claim the software is defective by design because its developers put PR metrics above reliability.

      If you don't believe me because I'm AC and never officially joined Slashdot because I don't want it data mining all my posts (do you really trust Dice or whomever Dice will sell Slashdot to?), here's a mailing list post about the issue: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-October/024452.html

    26. Re:A year later by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      If every major garage company started making garages a certain way, and a handful of people on some garage enthusiast forums started complaining that they were doing it completely wrong and the engineering priciniples sucked, I might be a little skeptical. Because, you know, if that were true, you'd have a few outcomes:

        1) there would be widespread reports of the failures of said garage engineering principles
        2) those companies would start losing customers en masse
        3) a new competitor eschewing those changes would pop up and become incredibly popular as they gave people what they wanted.

      Im not seeing that happen with systemd, which leads me to believe that either the complaints are niche, or overstated, or irrelevant, and that in any case Red Hat and Debian arent "doing it wrong" as badly as everyone on slashdot says they are.

    27. Re:A year later by LordLimecat · · Score: 2

      You seem to think that anyone who thinks the complaints are overblown are part of some systemd fanclub.

      Im not a full-time linux admin, Im just an observer noting that Red Hat and Debian retain their customer base despite the complaints that systemd is ruining the world, and we havent heard widespread reports of systemd induced system failures. That kind of makes me think that the complaints are vastly overstated and that the drama is unnecessary.

      If things really are that bad with systemd, I would have expected to see a new, highly popular distro pop up in the last several months (or in the next few months) that blows Red Hat and Debian away-- or perhaps to see CentOS split off and do their own thing. We arent seeing that, which again makes me question the "sky is falling" claims.

    28. Re:A year later by davydagger · · Score: 1

      What Red Hat and the systemd crowd doesn't want to here is that most users that care do not want systemd.

      What the anti-systemd crowd doesn't seem to get is that they are not most users. As far as the old init system, it needed to go.

      I currently use many distros that run systemd to include a RH7 derrivative, and I can only say good things about it.

    29. Re:A year later by armanox · · Score: 1

      We might not be most users, but we are the ones that made Linux popular in the server and embedded world.

      --
      I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
  10. Yeah right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I almost feel like installing it and documenting the inevitable ensuing failures, just to prove this article wrong.

    1. Re:Yeah right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then do it. Deliver proper proof.

  11. Linux fans will always hate Ubuntu now by NotDrWho · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    It made the mistake of becoming popular (at least by pathetic Linux standards) and DARED to aim at appealing to general users (ick!). And that made it forever uncool for Linux hipsters. Linux users hate any distro that's not obscure and all-but-impossible to use without knowing arcane command line syntax.

    --
    SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    1. Re:Linux fans will always hate Ubuntu now by Scutter · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      And that's exactly why Linux will never take over the desktop space. Every time a distro is poised to do it, the linux userbase turns on it for one reason or another. It happened to Redhat. It happened to Ubuntu. It'll keep happening until linux users get over their elitism and start welcoming Grandma to easy-to-use Not Windows.

      --

      "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
    2. Re:Linux fans will always hate Ubuntu now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sound so bitter. What's your real problem?

      C'mon.You can talk to us. We'll keep it to ourselves, promised!

    3. Re:Linux fans will always hate Ubuntu now by ckatko · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No no no no no no no no no.

      Your post actually comes off very much like a hipster. "They're all idiots, unlike me..."

      Ubuntu has made very significant, almost Metro-level failures by forcing their existing userbase to bend-over backwards to support an untapped userbase while compromising work-producing functionality. It's like when Nintendo released the Wii and pissed on all the hardcore gamers that made them a powerful company in the first place... they hurt their current base in pursuit of a new, casual one.

      Lastly, if you think Unix commands are an arcane syntax, you must also hate C, C++, C#, D, and Java, since they're all derived from a 70's "arcane syntax." But the fact you treat Unix commands as some sort of magic, means you never understood the most powerful part of Linux, and it's enough to write off your flippant comment to begin with.

    4. Re:Linux fans will always hate Ubuntu now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      But the fact you treat Unix commands as some sort of magic, means you never understood the most powerful part of Linux, and it's enough to write off your flippant comment to begin with.

      Lol! So your answer to his charge that you Linux users are all hipsters is to respond with "You're just not cool enough to understand, man"?

      Fucking perfect!

    5. Re:Linux fans will always hate Ubuntu now by mlts · · Score: 1

      The way to get Linux into the desktop space isn't by drawing individual users in. It is how IBM's PC became the standard -- take over business, then personal stuff follows.

      The trick is to get businesses to embrace a desktop distribution, by having the OS be able to be managed and policies set by Active Directory GPOs to being able to be audited/updated with existing management tools, to being able to be images and said images updated and maintained so reimaging a desktop is as simple as a PXE boot.

      Trying to woo individual users is like herding cats. Instead, get the big boys using your OS, and the personal users will follow.

    6. Re:Linux fans will always hate Ubuntu now by NotDrWho · · Score: 1, Insightful

      And that's exactly why Linux will never take over the desktop space. Every time a distro is poised to do it, the linux userbase turns on it for one reason or another.

      I actually rooted for Linux early on (no pun intended). But it didn't take long for me to realize that the Linux community was Linux's own worst enemy. MS and Apple are nothing next to the damage done by the Linux's own users every time they get into another fucking childish squabble and produce yet another one of thousands of confusing forks.

      They get off on being outsiders and being different. So anything that threatens to take their precious OS mainstream in any way is seen as a threat. MS and Apple aren't the ones holding it back at this point. It's being held back by its own douchebag user community and a confusing morass of competing distros and desktops.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    7. Re:Linux fans will always hate Ubuntu now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ubuntu has made very significant, almost Metro-level failures by forcing their existing userbase to bend-over backwards to support an untapped userbase while compromising work-producing functionality.

      Care to provide any examples? Because if the distribution you use is a hindrance to your "work-producing functionality" I have grave doubts about your competence.

    8. Re:Linux fans will always hate Ubuntu now by red+crab · · Score: 1

      Linux doesn't need the Desktop. Server is where it needs to be and where it already is, quite firmly in place.

    9. Re:Linux fans will always hate Ubuntu now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed.

    10. Re:Linux fans will always hate Ubuntu now by Gavagai80 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's not that being outsiders is the goal, it's that being popular isn't the goal. If a change will make things better for grandma and not affect me, then fine. If it'll make things better for grandma but affects my workflow negatively, then to hell with grandma, let her use Windows or Mac.

      (Personally, systemd doesn't affect my workflow so I'll let others argue about it... but if you start talking about something like hiding configuration options and advanced features, I'll be objecting.)

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    11. Re:Linux fans will always hate Ubuntu now by captnjohnny1618 · · Score: 1

      I think you're definitely right that there's a little bit of elitism in Linux use. A part of me loves that I had to patch a kernel to get Linux running on my laptop, but I think there's also more at play too.

      Part of the challenge is that the people using Linux and developing Linux don't need the handholding with computing and software that would make a desktop appealing to the mass market. In fact, I often find that sort of thing getting in the way when I have to use other systems. I think we've all experienced this. Thus, we probably won't ever foresee all of the stuff that grandma wants on her computer the way that people who are specifically trying to sell grandma a computer would (e.g. Steve Jobs). Honestly, I don't really want any of that stuff on my desktop machine anymore since we have so many devices that do that stuff so well but can't offer the flexibility of raw computational power of a desktop or a server. Thunderbird is a even a little overwrought to me...

      Yeah, there are douchebags in this community, and there are also good people, just like every community. Don't forget that there are a lot of things that brought this community into existence that make it awesome too. It'll change, grow, fork, fragment just like the rest 'em.

      And the assholes can screw off. Spend your energy on the folks that care and are willing to make a positive contribution.

    12. Re:Linux fans will always hate Ubuntu now by thsths · · Score: 1

      I completely agree. Nobody seems to work as a team any more, and at the slightest notion of disagreement things get forked. How many distros do we have now, certainly more than 10 important ones? How many do we need? Most people just want one, and then maybe a bit of choice, but most distros already provide more than enough choice within them.

  12. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    It's not using gnome3, but the good old Unity which IMHO is the best at multi-screen setups where both KDE and Gnome have quite a bit to catch up.

    Systemd is invisible for most ordinary users.

  13. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    >As far as I can tell, there is no root account I could log into directly

    Seriously?

    $ sudo passwd
    $ sudo passwd -u root

    There, now you can log into root directly and have all the security issues you want. Thanks for playing the "I don't know how to use linux" game

  14. LTS by AndyCanfield · · Score: 5, Informative

    15.04 is not an "LTS" (Long Term Support). So we will continue to run 14.04 LTS on our servers, and on my workstation. I guess we will stick to it for another year, until April 2016. Ah well. Good Luck, gang, and thank you for the good job, Ubuntu.

    1. Re:LTS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't grab VIRTUALBOX then. It trashed my 14.04, I was forced to upgrade to fix it. 14.10 did not correct the error, 15.04 did, but then trashed 4 other critical apps. 2 of which were just released and do not support systemd. And systemd nerds did not build in backward compatibility or shims.

      Linux (yes ALL) is now a fragmented mess. It was fragmented before, at least it was by vendor. Now it is all by tech requirements. systemd should have build first PID 2 version, then take over PID 1 meeting all old API untile all software in stack support new API.

    2. Re:LTS by Phreakiture · · Score: 1

      Personally, I gave up on VirtualBox some years ago when an update broke it to where it wouldn't run 64-bit images. I switched to KVM that day and haven't looked back.

      --
      www.wavefront-av.com
  15. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It shouldn't have a root account you can log into. If you want to be root, log into a privileged use and "sudo su".

  16. So far...close by chill · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I installed in on my HP ProBook 6475b laptop the other day and have only run into some minor issues.

    1. I opted for full disk encrypted LVM. It didn't ask for a separate Swap partition password, instead using the main one. Fine. However, when booting, I have to enter it twice -- once for the main partition, once for swap. [Bug reported and acknowledged]

    2. It hangs on reboot. I have to boot twice every time to get it to get past the boot loader. I've tried "shut down", then letting it sit for 10 minutes. Next boot -- hang and I reboot and then it works.

    3. My wifi doesn't come back after suspend. I think it has to do with the particular laptop firmware, because it does this with every distro I've tried. Everything else works, but the wifi never makes it out of suspend.

    The rest works fine. Changing to the proprietary AMD video drivers was a snap, and it sped up video playback to what I would expect (no stuttering on HD).

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    1. Re:So far...close by Khyber · · Score: 1

      " it sped up video playback to what I would expect (no stuttering on HD)."

      How old is your hardware? I've been doing HD 1080p video on Pentium 4s for a LONG time, under Linux and Windows.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    2. Re:So far...close by chill · · Score: 1

      So have I, but it depends on the video drivers.

      Under the FOSS drivers on both AMD and nVidia I can play the video fine, but if I move the mouse into the window, it lags.

      With the proprietary drivers this doesn't happen.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    3. Re:So far...close by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      Does the brightness control skip steps?

    4. Re:So far...close by complete+loony · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I've noticed the FOSS driver basically freezes when I move my mouse over VNC with debian testing. But 3D gaming works well enough that I don't notice any difference. Not saying there isn't any, just that the FOSS drivers are good enough for me now.

      --
      09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
    5. Re:So far...close by chill · · Score: 1

      No, it works fine for me using the keyboard function keys.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    6. Re:So far...close by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've tried "shut down", then letting it sit for 10 minutes.

      Out of curiosity: why the 10 minutes delay? coffee time?

    7. Re:So far...close by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      Good.

    8. Re:So far...close by vux984 · · Score: 2

      I installed in on my HP ProBook 6475b laptop the other day and have only run into some minor issues.

      Wifi not working after suspend on a laptop?
      Crashing on reboot every 2nd time?

      What you consider minor issues, I would consider deal breakers.

    9. Re:So far...close by DirePickle · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The wifi thing is pretty common. The solution is usually to add a hook to the suspend script to unload the wifi modules before suspending, and then reload them when resuming.

    10. Re:So far...close by fisted · · Score: 1

      presumably to wait for the system to truly be 'off', with caps discharged and all.

      A faster way to achieve the same is pressing the power button after turning off the PSU (or pulling the mains, if the PSU doesn't have a mechanical on/off switch).

    11. Re:So far...close by chill · · Score: 1

      Usually, I'd agree with you. In this case the laptop is a bit of a Frankenstein model. The CPU is an engineering sample of an AMD A-10, and the BIOS is missing details of serial numbers, etc. Makes for an odd boot, but it was cheap and does what I want. I've also replaced the stock RAM, drive, wireless, BlueTooth and everything else that could be replaced.

      The reboot thing is new and I suspect it has something to do with the boot loader. I expect to be able to fix it.

      The Wifi I'll have to investigate. I have some leads, but should be able to fix it.

      If it were an off-the-shelf model I'd agree with you, but because of what I've done to it I am a bit more tolerant.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    12. Re:So far...close by Chewbacon · · Score: 1

      Have the same issue with wifi on my HP laptop. This solution from Linux Mint forums worked for me: http://forums.linuxmint.com/vi...

      --
      Chewbacon
      The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
  17. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Yosho · · Score: 1

    Hi! Since you're new, let me welcome you to Ubuntu. Ubuntu has never had a login-enabled root account, and the use of one his highly discouraged four various security concerns. You should use "sudo" to run individual commands, or "sudo -s" if you need a root shell.

    --
    Karma: Terrifying (mostly affected by atrocities you've committed)
  18. sudo bash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Doesn't 'sudo bash' still work? I haven't used Ubuntu in a few releases.

    1. Re:sudo bash by fnj · · Score: 1

      It "works", but sudo bash doesn't run bash with the login option.
      Use sudo su -

    2. Re:sudo bash by LordLimecat · · Score: 1, Informative

      Im pretty sure that ubuntu uses dash, not bash.

      You can use bash, but things may behave abnormally.

    3. Re:sudo bash by kthreadd · · Score: 3, Informative

      By default Ubuntu uses dash as /bin/sh, but has /bin/bash as root's shell. Both can of course be changed by the user.

    4. Re:sudo bash by Ash-Fox · · Score: 3, Informative

      It "works", but sudo bash doesn't run bash with the login option.
      Use sudo su -

      Seriously, stop spreading bad practice. The proper practice is "sudo -i".

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    5. Re:sudo bash by war4peace · · Score: 1

      After reading the whole thread above I realized that 2015 won't be the Desktop Linux year either.
      The proper practice for Average Joe is point-n-grunt. Ubuntu tries to make that happen and they've been doing a good job so far.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    6. Re:sudo bash by fuzzyf · · Score: 1

      Why is sudo su bad practice compared to sudo -i ?
      (I am asking because I really don't know and would like to)

    7. Re:sudo bash by Ghjnut · · Score: 2
      --
      MouseClass extends ScrollClass, which extends TabClass, which extends SidebarClass, which extends PowerClass, w
    8. Re:sudo bash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not "bad practice", each method has its advantages and disadvantages. People need to stop misusing the word "proper" when what they really mean is "way to do it in my opinion".

    9. Re:sudo bash by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      It's not "bad practice", each method has its advantages and disadvantages.

      I agree to using "su -" or "sudo -i" independently. But together? There is no genuine advantage, just the disadvantage of being wasteful (allocating pointless excess ttys, redirects), potentially prevented from even working (when either su or sudo have been hardened to prevent use to ensure use of the other).

      Since you stated there are advantages. What exactly is the advantage of using 'sudo su -' over "sudo -i" or "su -" ?

      People need to stop misusing the word "proper" when what they really mean is "way to do it in my opinion".

      I wanted to use the term "idiotic", but I felt it was a bit harsh. What I've stated is fact, not an opinion.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    10. Re:sudo bash by rakslice · · Score: 2

      It's because some people take such things way too seriously. I would suggest that you try each one and compare the resulting environment variable values, and then choose whichever best suits your purpose. And to trolls who find 'sudo su -' shocking, exactly which resulting difference are you concerned about? I'm curious.

    11. Re:sudo bash by fuzzyf · · Score: 1

      Thank you for the link. I have red that some time ago.
      Still not clear on why sudo su - is bad practice. It looks very similar to sudo -i

    12. Re:sudo bash by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      After reading the whole thread above I realized that 2015 won't be the Desktop Linux year either.

      You're confusing the terminal for the desktop.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    13. Re:sudo bash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sudo -i doesn't stay in the cwd.

    14. Re:sudo bash by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      Fuck it, I'll do ssh root@localhost!
      I'm sure that does the trick to please the login gods.

  19. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by gstoddart · · Score: 1, Interesting

    There, now you can log into root directly and have all the security issues you want. Thanks for playing the "I don't know how to use linux" game

    Guess what, Skippy, I've been running Linux since Slackware 0.99 on a gazillion floppies in 1993

    I've been a UNIX developer and Admin.

    I know how to run Linux, and I even know how to use sudo. But Ubuntu isn't set up to *want* you to use root.

    Ubuntu has said "there is a user who owns the system, and we'll use something like UAC to get permissions on demand".

    Ubuntu isn't targeting people who need to feel like "teh lunix exparts".

    And, really, that's OK. Because Ubuntu isn't going for smarmy assholes like you who need to log into root and wave around their penis.

    Why why don't you either man up and post without being an AC, or shut the fuck up and stop acting like a whiny little punk?

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  20. Re: Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What is wrong with multiscreen gnome 3? It works great here.

  21. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have to say that Unity is pretty nice these days. It's stable, it looks cool (no ugly modern flat appearance), and they don't shuffle things around, so everything is always found in familiar places. Also the user experience has been polished and feels comfortable.

  22. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by fnj · · Score: 2, Informative

    Everybody knows it's:
    $ sudo passwd # to give root a password so you can log in as root
    and
    $ sudo su - # to log in as root

  23. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

    Personally I wish no distro was set up to want you to use root... I have...less than fond... memories of torching everything in my Slackware systems by accident back when I used it in the late nineties.

    After a temporary switch to Mac OS X in the early 2000s, I realized sudo was the way to go, and was very glad when I found modern distros reflected that.

    Ubuntu isn't targeting people who need to feel like "teh lunix exparts".

    Agree. It's actually aimed at a combination of newbies, and experienced *ix users. One should be protected from root at all costs. The other is experienced enough to know they should be too...

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  24. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by mlts · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It follows the same path that OS X and Solaris 11 do, with the root user disabled by default, with the first user created having sudo access to root. A quick change of root's password can enable this if needed.

    All and all, this is a good thing. There are a lot of security audit checklists that are starting to require root not be able to be logged on directly, so shipping an OS that has this locked down is not unusual.

    For personal use, there isn't anything wrong with unlocking root and using that with su or just logging directly in. However, in business/enterprise settings, it does make sense to have a user stage, even if it is just having different RSA keys in root's authorized_hosts file that belongs to each individual user. I like unlocking root locally, so I can log in with that in single user mode, but having remote root access completely disabled.

  25. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Informative

    Yeah, I have seen far too many people who want to run as root/admin because it's more convenient.

    And I have seen far too many people staring at a screen with that "oh, shit, what do I do now?" look because they just royally fsck'd their system.

    In fact, I've known several admins who I subsequently came to realize were mostly faking it after several instances of completely hosing a system because they just thought it was easier to stay logged in as root/admin "just in case".

    Same with all of the crap software on Windows which says "oh, just disable UAC or this software to work". or "this software needs to run as root/admin". Yeah, sorry, but no. If you're software insists I disable sane security on my system, your software sucks, and you were too damned lazy to write better code. Hell, I saw one thing years ago which said "the admin user should have a blank password for this software to work" ... and it didn't get installed.

    The problem is people get into that period where they think "I'm a big boy admin now, I don't need safeguards because I'm that good". Those people are generally dangerous and reckless fools.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  26. Nice by havana9 · · Score: 1

    Ok.
    $ nice bash
    $

    Happy now?

  27. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by digitalchinky · · Score: 1

    From the Ubuntu website, (serverFaq) the only listed security concern seems to be that 'people might try and brute force the root password if the account is enabled', all other reasons are administrative. It's not highly discouraged, it's just a different approach.

  28. Red Hat will crush Linux competitors by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    Red Hat is operating right out of Microsoft's playbook.

    Remember when Microsoft was buddy-buddy with Apple, and IBM?

    Once Linux is completely dependent on Red Hat controlled technologies, Red Hat will always be two steps ahead of the competition, it will be seriously difficult for Linux users to use anything except Red Hat.

    What happens when Red Hat decides there is no reason for more than one package management solution? Red Hat will say that users demanded one standardized package management, and systemd will only work if Red Hat's solution is installed. Wait for it.

    1. Re:Red Hat will crush Linux competitors by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 2

      Red Hat is operating right out of Microsoft's playbook.

      Remember when Microsoft was buddy-buddy with Apple, and IBM?

      Once Linux is completely dependent on Red Hat controlled technologies, Red Hat will always be two steps ahead of the competition, it will be seriously difficult for Linux users to use anything except Red Hat.

      What happens when Red Hat decides there is no reason for more than one package management solution? Red Hat will say that users demanded one standardized package management, and systemd will only work if Red Hat's solution is installed. Wait for it.

      to late. Linux Standard Base (LSB) requires support for use of rpm (redhat package manager) they railroaded that through despite debian ubuntu and others protest.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    2. Re:Red Hat will crush Linux competitors by Eponymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      About a billion Android devices ship every year and all of these are running Linux. Red Hat might yield a lot of power, but it's over a relatively small slice of the market.

    3. Re: Red Hat will crush Linux competitors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rpm was mandated by lsb long before Ubuntu even existed.

    4. Re:Red Hat will crush Linux competitors by ookaze · · Score: 1, Troll

      Red Hat is operating right out of Microsoft's playbook.

      Remember when Microsoft was buddy-buddy with Apple, and IBM?

      Once Linux is completely dependent on Red Hat controlled technologies, Red Hat will always be two steps ahead of the competition, it will be seriously difficult for Linux users to use anything except Red Hat.

      What happens when Red Hat decides there is no reason for more than one package management solution? Red Hat will say that users demanded one standardized package management, and systemd will only work if Red Hat's solution is installed. Wait for it.

      You should learn what Free Software is, because right now you look like an idiot.
      The GPL prevents the kind of control you're talking about, and systemd is licensed under the GPL.
      Plus systemd contains a PID 1 daemon so what you say doesn't make any sense.

    5. Re:Red Hat will crush Linux competitors by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

      Once everybody is dependent on systemd, Red Hat will change things.

      Yeah, systemd is open, just like OOXML is "open" - again, right out of Microsoft's playbook.

    6. Re:Red Hat will crush Linux competitors by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

      Android may be based on Linux, but it is not Linux. Android is rarely used as a desktop, or server. As such, Android is irrelevant to the desktop, or server, market.

    7. Re:Red Hat will crush Linux competitors by Eponymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      it is not Linux

      Of course it isn't. It runs on Linux the same way that Gnome does or Emacs does.

      Android is irrelevant to the desktop, or server, market

      Since Android is by far the predominant use of Linux, you might have it backwards. The desktop and server market might be irrelevant to Linux. I would argue the server market matters, but it would be very difficult to argue that the desktop market matters at all, except for things like Chrome books.

      If desktop Unix is what you want, a Mac running OSX is what you should get.

  29. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by dwpbike · · Score: 1

    i last logged in to root on redhat9. i learned my lesson.

  30. Mint 15 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'sudo bash' and 'sudo -su root' do the same thing.

    1. Re:Mint 15 by kthreadd · · Score: 3, Informative

      How about sudo -i?

    2. Re:Mint 15 by fnj · · Score: 2

      'sudo bash' and 'sudo -su root' do the same thing.

      Wrong, genius. See which one runs /root/.bash_profile and which one doesn't. See which one gets PATH set to root's path and which one doesn't. Neither of yours does.

      sudo -i is probably the command you are reaching for. Very similar to sudo su -. Whichever one you are comfortable with. They both do a true root login.

    3. Re:Mint 15 by fnj · · Score: 1

      Yep; absolutely. Just as good. I think it wasn't there when I learned my trick.

    4. Re: Mint 15 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, that's always been there. Documentation just isn't something that 'leet users read, so they stay on Gentoo.

    5. Re: Mint 15 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gentoo has good documentation.

    6. Re:Mint 15 by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      Or just sudo su. Piece of cake! To enable the root account it may go like this
      $ sudo su
      # passwd

      I never found the need to care about subtilities of sudo -i or su -, at least in that environment or context :). I've just checked the differences and the significant thing is that /usr/games is removed from the path when doing proper login, which is as sad as Windows without Solitaire. I have a rot13 program installed there.

  31. Beware updating if using KDE by wytcld · · Score: 1

    A 14.10 system that my kid had an elaborate KDE desktop setup on, we upgraded to 15.04, and it totally lost his desktop arrangement. This had originally been Xubuntu, then with KDE installed, so not straight Kubuntu, and we were able to revert to using his old Xfce setup for now, which came through the upgrade okay. But it really was a bad experience losing his work with KDE that way. KDE is just the barest desktop now, which is frankly ugly and it seems it has lost features as well as his prior configuration.

    --
    "with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
    1. Re:Beware updating if using KDE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, they're using Plasma 5 now, which is not an adequate replacing for version 4 yet. It's not as bad as the change to KDE 4.0 in Kubuntu Intrepid Ibex was, but I'm holding off on upgrading.

    2. Re:Beware updating if using KDE by Windwraith · · Score: 1

      I completely agree. Plasma 5 is not quite done yet, it's lost a ton of abilities and there's no easy way to bring "plasma 4" plasmoids to it without a full rewrite. It's quite bleak really, I had to migrate to another desktop as well. And this is coming from someone who used KDE4 from the start after updating from 3. 3 to 4 added new toys and abilities to the table, but 4 to 5 feels like KDE4 all undone.

      I fear the day KDE4 libraries required to run Krusader are totally gone. I can't find a replacement with the same capabilities.

    3. Re:Beware updating if using KDE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It looks like Krusader is under active development, have they come out and said they're quitting on KDE5?

    4. Re:Beware updating if using KDE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      KDE is just the barest desktop now, which is frankly ugly and it seems it has lost features as well as his prior configuration.

      Not really a surprise, considering Kubuntu was also the front-runner in the early KDE4 adoption debacle that people still give KDE devs shit for to this day. This idiocy is why I stick with Debian and wait. Except for systemd, they don't generally adopt half-tested shit before it's ready. OpenSUSE, which is a KDE-focused distro, hasn't even made the switch yet, why the hell is Kubuntu? It's like they want to make people quit using KDE.

  32. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by davydagger · · Score: 3, Informative
    I had a few technical gripes with Ubuntu, but lets ignore the technical failings, and just assume that all critiques are purely social, because well, you want them to be. But remember, these people are nerds not writers or soft scientists, so the fair amount of projection about their motives can stay put. Some real reasons I frown on Ubuntu:

    1. build quality of 14.xx was utter crap. It crashed more than windows.

    2. Unity had some privacy issues with sending user search data to paying partners automaticly(amazon).

    3. Canonical doesn't like to give back upstream. Before you say anything, there are many companies that do wonderful things for the kernel, GNU, and related bits and pieces to make the magic happen. The two biggest contributors being Intel and Red Hat, but linux has a lot of very large corporate heavy hitters world wide contributing great things. After not giving back, the CEO and founder Mark Shuttleworth talks a lot of shit about the people who are actually doing most of the real work. MIR/Wayland is the latest fiasco. instead of contributing to wayland, they decided to make their own graphics server, which ultimately will only be used by them. The supposed cause of wayland not being advanced enough turned out to be bogus, as RH will likely ship fedora with wayland default long before Canonical does a MIR default Ubuntu. Oh yeah. Speaking of Red Hat, not only do they make a rock solid distro, they contribute back, and oh, they still manage to turn a profit, something Canonical seems unable to do.

    4. previous versions of Unity where dog slow, but they've seemed to have gotten better.

    For the non-technical, I recommend Mint, which was forked from Ubuntu, and contains most of the good n00b friendly stuff from ubuntu. It goes down easy and it "Just works". The best part is I can "OEM Install" it, so I can put it as the default OS on computers I fix up and give away, and not have to worry about pirated copies of windows, or the non-techies getting all confuzzled.

  33. why the fight!! Ubuntu is growing up.. Why compare by RohanShah · · Score: 0

    Well a preety good step.. Lets cheer them up who worked so hard and growing up Debian based distro so far... We all have worked with RH base and then different flavors.. All were preety good to our requirements as needed. Yes our production servers still run CentOS or some RH based distro.. Debian was always the big guy with stable release... Ubuntu came with a bang some years back... And i dont see much difference on server side with Ubuntu too.. But hey Desktop team running Windows were happy with the migration to Ubuntu desktop unlike CentOS /Suse / Mint etc.. So i will give them +1 And no wonder Ubuntu Server edition is also growing up smooth like a Beer. No matter how much u push in there is still some space for more. Yes and still doesnt tap out. So +1 Lets jus cheer up on an awesome piece of work and explore possibilities.

  34. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by avgjoe62 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I always tell new folk around here that there are three stages of competency in System Administration.

    There is the newbie, that is afraid to do much because they don't know what they can do.

    There are the old farts, that don't do much because they know what they can do.

    And then there are the really dangerous ones in between, who do too much because they think they know what they can do.

    --

    How come Slashdot never gets Slashdotted?

  35. Thanks for the new screensaver that uses 100% CPU by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    xubuntu user here.
    I have a Thinkpad T440s with an external monitor connected to the display port and when I boot the computer or lock the screen, both laptop and monitor screens turn white and the cpu fan starts.
    The white screen only goes away when I unplug the display port or press some random keys on the keyboard.

    Really smooth.

  36. Re:Ubuntu = MS Windows of Linux by davydagger · · Score: 1
    if your that l33t, go run Temple OS on bare metal, or GTFO.

    noobs deserve freedom too.

    Also, I recommend mint for noobs. Much easier, less fail.

  37. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

    But why?

  38. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by LordLimecat · · Score: 2

    So what you're basically saying is that by default, there is no root account to log into directly? Thanks for spending your (surely very valuable) time verifying this trivial aspect of that post, even though it was irrelevant to the poster's overall point.

    No, thats not what hes saying. "sudo passwd -u root" requests elevated rights to reset the password for the root account, which is by default completely random. The account does already exist, as it cant not exist on a linux box (afaik).

    Ubuntu is just designed to prevent you from using it, as sudo and gksudo are the preferred methods of gaining root privileges.

  39. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Rob+Y. · · Score: 1

    To the extent that Ubuntu provides a stable enough base for distros like Mint to base off of - giving users the confidence that Ubuntu-targeted apps will work on Mint as well, Ubuntu's done its job admirably. If only by making it possible for other distros to install on UEFI based machines (with or without secure boot - plenty of distros are still only just getting there).

    Mir is problematic, and if it introduces enough incompatibility to Ubuntu packages, that could force other distros to re-fork off of something else (or continue on based on a pre-Mir base). Hopefully, Wayland will become viable long enough before Mir does that the two efforts can ultimately merge - not necessarily the code bases, but support for whatever functionality Canonical thought it needed that Wayland didn't provide. Or at least, the GNOME and KDE bits that will define most Wayland or Mir apps can get support from both camps to make everything 'just work' - perhaps even better than X11 does today...

    --
    Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
  40. Can it wake up from hibernate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Great, can it be hibernated and then actually wake up from said hibernation? This is a feature I've been waiting for for years now.

    1. Re:Can it wake up from hibernate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Remember that even Windows has had working hibernate for only 15 years. It takes a while to catch up.

    2. Re:Can it wake up from hibernate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It has? In my experience only OS X sleeps without issues. And I've used all the big three.

    3. Re:Can it wake up from hibernate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But if your PC has been in hibernate for 15 years, why spoil it now? Sure you could finally finish that game of mine sweeper, but you record would end.

  41. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by vga_init · · Score: 1

    Pfft. I don't even used systems that don't come with systemd and Gnome 3 by default.

  42. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

    The concern is the same concern that says "Never run a web browser with admin privileges". Doing a particular task with root privileges is fine; doing everything by default with root is just asking for a nasty accident or exploit.

  43. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm pretty sure the entire point of the article was that a good systemd flamewar is good for the hit count.

  44. Re: Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >there is no root account I could log into directly
    Did you try `sudo -s`? Don't blame the OS for your failure to RTFM

  45. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by danbob999 · · Score: 1

    As far as I can tell, there is no root account I could log into directly

    Yeah, it should come with a default password such as "admin" as well as a SSH server enabled by default so that I can just ssh root@myIPAddress.

  46. Re: Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by davidshewitt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've seen a lot of posts in this thread about how people have massively hosed a system while logged in directly as root. I'd be curious to know exactly what command(s) caused the issue. I'm guessing some variant of rm or dd. How would sudo have prevented it? I log in as root directly when I know I need to do something that requires it. My root shell colors the prompt red as a reminder. I log out when I'm done. I think at the end of the day, not hosing up your system is best prevented by constant awareness when you're logged in as root or running something as root. You could just as easily trash your box with a mis-typed sudo command.

  47. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by davydagger · · Score: 1

    To the extent that Ubuntu provides a stable enough base for distros like Mint to base off of - giving users the confidence that Ubuntu-targeted apps will work on Mint as well, Ubuntu's done its job admirably.

    which is far more debian's doing than Ubuntu. Debian are the real people who make an operating system out of parts, and do most of the heavy lifting of stiching it all together

    Mir is problematic, and if it introduces enough incompatibility to Ubuntu packages, that could force other distros to re-fork off of something else (or continue on based on a pre-Mir base). Hopefully, Wayland will become viable long enough before Mir does that the two efforts can ultimately merge

    Like most other failed needless canonical projects, bazar and upstart, its going to be abandoned, and Ubuntu will eventually run wayland. Which is what Canonical could have done in the first place, perhaps contributed to the development of wayland, which could have helped reduce the amount of time it takes to get it in release condition.

  48. Re:Thanks for the new screensaver that uses 100% C by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uninstall gnome-screensaver and install xscreensaver, add a startup entry "xscreensaver -nosplash" then set your preferences then restart.

  49. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

    I'm in the old fart category, you insensitive clod!

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  50. I installed systemd and my computer didn't explode by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

    .. but I may have gotten a few infections from the pages I had to visit to use it.

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  51. Re: Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Copied from http://www.linuxforums.org/forum/ubuntu-linux/174467-why-sudo-better-than-logging-root.html

    - With sudo, you do not need the root password. Just your user password.
    - Root has no restrictions. You can easily destroy your system with just one command
    - using sudo for elevated access creates awareness ("Now I need to be careful")
    - sudo can be restricted to certain commands, users and groups. Whereas root = root = full access
    - from remote (ssh): if you first have to login as a user via key and then elevate to root, you need to present *two* credentials before you have full access. Which improves security. Remote root logins should be disabled for this reason.

  52. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by fnj · · Score: 1

    Why not?

  53. I am loving it, but KDE4 lovers, beware. by Windwraith · · Score: 3, Interesting

    After installing I have two main highlights. Excuse the verbosity, but since it's apropos, I really want to share my two cents and hear what other people thinks.

    1) The shipped Plasma 5.3 is complete butt. Massive loss of functionality, completely broke my workflow. You might remember me defending KDE4 at every chance, and that's because it wasn't as bad as this by 4.3. Missing icons; lost of "old" systray icons; Icon-only task manager lost all options and unity launcher abilities; Klipper is half-baked and doesn't do a lot of things it did before (despite keyboard bindings showing those actions); kwin refuses to save per-window settings (works from control center, but not from window menu); the Breeze theme is bugged and doesn't show (instead Oxygen does, for whatever reason, despite zapping my settings entirely, and there's no matching GTK theme, so all consistency gets broken); dumps files on .config, making it super noisy; lots of actions that were able to get hotkeys don't accept hotkeys (despite the GUI being there, it refuses to save); several lost plasmoids (not even a simple network monitor now) and other surviving ones lost several options; and konsole refuses to obey the option to show "konsole - " on titlebar, making window matching by title never work. Kwin is still excellent, but it suffers being part of a desktop in such a miserable state and Konsole is still my favorite terminal. (I am open to suggestions just in case)
    It doesn't even attempt to port old settings properly, and it's far too early to deploy. And this time there wasn't even the excuse to make it "for developers". It's really, really half-baked and I hope the missing stuff comes back eventually. It's only usable if you stick to the defaults and don't bother customizing it too much, and if you don't have habits or must-have plasmoids from KDE4.

    2) Everything else worked really well. systemd works pretty well and I already got to tune it up. Very fast reboot and shutdown. Not seeing why the hate, it works for me.
    Mod me down if you want, and I am aware anecdotes aren't data, but it works and I was able to migrate all my custom things easily. The only defect I found is that it likes to start disk checks more often than it should, like it does a main disk check once every 10 reboots. Doesn't take long so it's not a real problem, but it bothers me it's not doing every 30 mounts as I had it set as.
    Otherwise, my system feels almost more responsive than before, and I am pretty sure it's not placebo effect. I mostly notice it with loading small apps and doing management tasks, but it's definitely a little bit faster. A few exotic bugs with my hardware got fixed and it's all now working great.

    Anyway, I had to use Unity as a temporary desktop until I figure out some solution to my KDE problems and the good things and updates prevent me from rolling back. Two days later I got used to it and I am doing my usual computer routine with minor differences.

    Gotta say, it's improved greatly since last time I used it. Having the menus in the window titlebar (saves space and doesn't require traveling to the top as in the OSX-like menu, best of both worlds), minimize-on-click, ability to adjust titlebar size and other minor fixes make it...*gasp* rather usable. I miss the window automation from kwin, but managed to replicate the missing window management features with some hackery and obscure Compiz features, so I only remember I am using another desktop when the windows appear in crazy places. Only took me a day to get used to the previously annoying "close button at left" business, but otherwise it feels usable for everyday work. Compared to its original incarnation it's quite the improvement. I'd even dare calling it "good enough", not the best, but just "good enough". The titlebar menus and the Launcher API abilities are pretty appealing features though.
    A disclaimer, though, I always had a taskbar at the left even in the early 90s, so I find it "natural", but other people might be annoyed by the taskba

    1. Re:I am loving it, but KDE4 lovers, beware. by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 2

      KDE is always broken on Kubuntu. To get a proper KDE with Debian-like system you need to use the Mint distro.

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    2. Re:I am loving it, but KDE4 lovers, beware. by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      Or, maybe, try Debian?

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    3. Re:I am loving it, but KDE4 lovers, beware. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      and there's no matching GTK theme

      Does gtk-qt-engne still work? (QGtkStyle, which goes the other way, is part of Qt.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:I am loving it, but KDE4 lovers, beware. by qubezz · · Score: 2

      15.04 ships with KDE Plasma 5.2. In order to get 5.3 and future KDE updates, you will need to add the backports ppa repository:

      sudo add-apt-repository ppa:kubuntu-ppa/backports
      sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get dist-upgrade

    5. Re:I am loving it, but KDE4 lovers, beware. by cynicist · · Score: 1

      I also dislike random placement of windows. Here are some tweaks you may find useful.

    6. Re:I am loving it, but KDE4 lovers, beware. by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

      Or that. I did not recommended it because I do not deal with Debian for some time, so I'm not sure if the KDE from it is still okay.

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    7. Re:I am loving it, but KDE4 lovers, beware. by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      Where does mint get it's KDE?

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    8. Re:I am loving it, but KDE4 lovers, beware. by Windwraith · · Score: 1

      Yes, ended up using that to match a gtk theme instead of the other way around. Everything looked a bit funny but a bit, but already got used to the change.

    9. Re:I am loving it, but KDE4 lovers, beware. by Windwraith · · Score: 1

      I did that, I explicitly mentioned 5.3 to avoid confusion.
      Few bugs or new features from 5.2 to 5.3 though, if not for the version numbers and a few ported tools there was barely any change between the two.

    10. Re:I am loving it, but KDE4 lovers, beware. by Windwraith · · Score: 1

      I set it to "cascade", but I miss the "zero-corner" behavior from Kwin. With random I meant like instead of starting at the left edge, it moves down or right a little, requiring moving the windows manually (or invoking a script) so they don't overlap with some windows at the side that are always open. Trying to find some workaround to that.

    11. Re:I am loving it, but KDE4 lovers, beware. by Windwraith · · Score: 1

      I don't know, I keep hearing it's broken in Ubuntu, but despite using mainline Ubuntu with only the required KDE packages I used (which is probably the less recommended way to go with it), it worked like a charm since 4.3-ish until 5.2-5.3.
      Then again I am a bit of a power user and could iron out most quirks myself, and I know userland linux like the palm of my hand, which I admit is something the average user can't waste time doing.

    12. Re:I am loving it, but KDE4 lovers, beware. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How it it broken, especially given that Mint derives from Ubuntu?

  54. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by e70838 · · Score: 1

    why not
    sudo -i
    This gives a root shell

  55. Historic 3.18.3 (and nasty btrfs-zero-log gotchas) by LordMyren · · Score: 2

    Vivid Vervet ships with 3.18.3 rather than a modern 3.18 such as 3.18.12, which seems unconscionable.

    In particular, there's a known regression where BTRFS fails to clear it's logs and the system become unbootable. This gotcha seems to take around two weeks to manifest, at which point the kernel will lock. https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/...

  56. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Junta · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The 'article' is an editorial presented as something to be taken as representative of the community at large. My impression is that Canonical is losing mindshare quickly to Mint on the desktop, that Canonical really doesn't care that much about desktop anyway as they pin their business hopes and dreams on servers and embedded (where it also is failing to get much traction business wise).

    Note that none of this has to do with the parents referenced points: Gnome 3 (which is largely defined by Gnome Shell, which Ubuntu doesn't even use by default) and systemd (I'm sympathetic, but not sure it's making much of a difference either way in the desktop distribution selection right now).

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  57. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "As far as I can tell, there is no root account I could log into directly..."

    And, really, that's OK. Because Ubuntu isn't going for smarmy assholes like you who need to log into root and wave around their penis.

    Wow. You assert that there's no way to log in as root, and when someone corrects you, you proceed to wave around your penis with "I was a younicks d3v way back in '93!! I used teh floppeezzz!!!!"

    Having a bad day, are we?

  58. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Jax+Omen · · Score: 1

    I'm a Linux noob, but I recently wiped my Ubuntu installation in favor of Linux Mint beacuse whatever the default environment of Ubuntu is (Unity?) looked and felt like OSX.

    I couldn't figure out how to do damn near anything, requiring me to google terminal commands to do basic functions because the GUI was so obfuscated.

    Cinnamon on Mint so far has been quite user-friendly. Have only used the terminal when it seemed easier than going through the GUI, not because I *couldn't* go through the GUI. And it doesn't feel like a goddamn mac.

  59. Re: Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by cayenne8 · · Score: 2
    I'm kind of the same way. I log into root when I really need to do something...just a habit from old Slackware days.

    But I do try to make damned sure I double check my directory I'm in, as well as the command before I hit enter.

    I've blown stuff up before, but mostly as other users...likely that I wasn't being as careful when in as those users as I was when I'm wielding root around.

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  60. Re:Thanks for the new screensaver that uses 100% C by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't have gnome-screensaver installed. But thanks for your suggestion. I will try that later.

  61. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

    If you want to be root, log into a privileged use and "sudo su".

    The correct command is "sudo -i", if you want a root shell. Doing the above comment just spreads bad practice.

    --
    Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  62. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Ash-Fox · · Score: 0

    $ sudo su - # to log in as root

    I despise you.

    --
    Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  63. New Wallpaper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OMG sign me up!

    "Old time users of Ubuntu will notice that the 15.04 edition now comes with a new wallpaper that's not orange. It might have to do with the fact that Ubuntu is changing and that it's finally leaving its past behind or maybe it's just a new cool background"

  64. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by jellomizer · · Score: 2

    Ok... The article should be "Ubuntu 15.04 is well received by users who do not fall on the autism spectrum."

    Ubuntu has been the consumer level Linux. If Systemd or Gnome versions is that big of a deal, you probably should pick a different distribution.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  65. Re: Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Setting a password is unnecessary. Use sudo -i or sudo su and avoid allowing password login for root.

  66. Re:Thanks for the new screensaver that uses 100% C by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This seems more like a light-locker / xfce power management issue while managing multiple screens...

  67. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    bad practice?

    What exactly is bad about sudo su -?

  68. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And I have seen far too many people staring at a screen with that "oh, shit, what do I do now?" look because they just royally fsck'd their system.

    Always do a ZFS snapshot prior to doing something dangerous.

  69. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Congratulations for specifically catching the entire point of the article

  70. Re: Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by myrdos2 · · Score: 1

    If you only sudo the commands that need it, you minimize the odds that one of the commands that don't need it will Bork your system.

  71. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Strangely+Familiar · · Score: 0

    You didn't correct him. In the first post, you misinterpreted his statements and corrected your misinterpretations. Then you insulted him. Now, in your second post, you ridicule him for being insulted. Smarmy adj. Hypocritically, complacently, or effusively earnest; unctuous.

    --
    Join the IParty!
  72. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    reset the password for the root account, which is by default completely random

    It's blank by default, and the system is set to disallow logins for accounts with blank passwords. That's actually more secure than having a randomly assigned password.

  73. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    sudo -i changes the current working directory to roots home directory, which may not be what you want.

  74. Re:Historic 3.18.3 (and nasty btrfs-zero-log gotch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The upside is it won't take much to oldconfig to a 4.0 Kernel. The good news is that every kernel release has it's own Ubuntu build, so get the .deb for 4.0.* and away you go.

  75. Re: Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Culture20 · · Score: 1

    You could just as easily trash your box with a mis-typed sudo command.

    Yep, and it's so easy too. You can have the exact idea of what you want to do, but a typo sneaks in anyway. The example I always tell people is when trying to type /bin/rm -r /Data/ and they use the right-shift to capitalize the D, it's so easy to miss and press enter. Then your command is /bin/rm -r / (even typing that in this textbox is giving me pause). Even just /bin/rm -r /home/Bob or /bin/rm -r /usr/local/Foo could cause significant pain with this style of mistyping.
    So I tell people that whenever they plan on doing a recursive delete or recursive anything, type the target first (/Data), then return to the beginning of the command line and type the executable and other parameters. That way, it's less likely a mis-key will result in disaster.

    I dislike using sudo because I type in so many commands that I get into the habit of typing my password after every one, then I'm on a system where sudo caches the credentials, and I start typing my password on the command line.

  76. If the upgrade path is anything like by kilodelta · · Score: 1

    12.04LTE to 14.04LTE no thank you. I had a Dell laptop with 12.04LTE on it and one day it asked if I wanted to go to 14.04. So it downloaded everything and when it came back up it was command line only, no gui whatsoever. I had to download and install Gnome manually. That has soured me a bit on Ubuntu.

  77. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, you could just have installed KDE or XFCE - no need to do a complete re-install actually.

  78. Re: Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or just use rm -i in the beginning to scout out what's actually going to get borked first, then do CTRL+C and repeat without the -i if you're feeling confident.

    I wish rm had a dry-run option, like rsync does.

  79. Judging subsystem quality by boot speed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    SystemD seems to be really nice, it booted so much faster than what was there before.

    If you judge the quality of a Linux subsystem by how fast it boots, you deserve every bit of any troubles that may be heading your way if the subsystem fails in other respects.

    Security and stability are the two most important engineering metrics for an operating system, by far. Boot speed is a totally ridiculous basis on which to judge whether a design choice was well advised or not.

  80. Compitant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's entirely untrue. I certainly am half as compitant as I think I am.

  81. Re:Ubuntu = MS Windows of Linux by BlackPignouf · · Score: 2

    Mint is not just for noobs.

  82. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by armanox · · Score: 1

    To date I've found that KDE has always had the best multimoniter support. And aside from not being able to set a per-screen background, what's wrong with GNOME's support?

    --
    I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
  83. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by armanox · · Score: 1

    You sound like a Fedora user.

    --
    I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
  84. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by blue9steel · · Score: 1

    Or perhaps it could just prompt for a password on installation like any reasonable distro does?

  85. Re:Historic 3.18.3 (and nasty btrfs-zero-log gotch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On my Vivid system:
    $ uname -r
    3.19.0-15-generic

    Probably an update over the base install - but fixed either way.

  86. Re: Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by fisted · · Score: 1

    On my private machines, i handle it the same. On machines where I'm not the only admin, the policy is to use sudo and getting a root shell is strictly verboten (except in rare cases which actually demand it). The reason for this is is logging. Way easier to fix a mess someone else created if there's a log of what exactly they did with elevated privs

  87. Missing the point by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    systemd is underwritten - if not actually written - by Red Hat.
    Given their cozy, lucrative government contracts, I trust Red Hat even less than Microsoft.

  88. Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I installed ubuntu 15.04 and I returned to ubuntu 14.04
    The main problem was systemD.
    When you shutdown the system, the computer turns itself off immediately. That happens because systemD performs a hard shutdown of all the applications and services.
    Well, I do not want to have data corruption just because the new "standard" according to systemD is send a kill -9 to all the applications.

    They are other issues. But this one is unacceptable.

    1. Re:Really? by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      When you shutdown the system, the computer turns itself off immediately. That happens because systemD performs a hard shutdown of all the applications and services.

      Well, I do not want to have data corruption just because the new "standard" according to systemD is send a kill -9 to all the applications.

      Anyone non-anonymous willing to verify this?

  89. Re: Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by fisted · · Score: 1

    sudo -s doesn't log in as root, it merely gives you a root shell with mostly your old environment. Speaking of failure to RTFM...

  90. Re:Ubuntu = MS Windows of Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    eh, I'm an embedded linux developer. My preferred distro is Mint. So either I'm a n00b, or I've got too much to do to spend a weekend trying to get my keyboard to be detected.

  91. Related Links... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1350 Gunmen Kill 12, Wound 7 At French Magazine HQ
    1198 Misogyny, Entitlement, and Nerds
    1128 Officer Not Charged In Michael Brown Shooting
    1081 How To Execute People In the 21st Century
    1040 Seattle Approves $15 Per Hour Minimum Wage

    Yeah, thanks /.

  92. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by raynet · · Score: 1

    Isn't the correct command "sudo -s"?

    --
    - Raynet --> .
  93. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by danbob999 · · Score: 1

    Ubuntu is trying to make the installer as simple as possible for the average user. The power user will know how to set a root password after installation anyways. At first I felt it was awkward too but I now like the idea. The installer should never force you to make a choice that can easily be postponed after the installation without any consequence.

  94. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Question is - how do you get to the old fart category without passing the dangerous zone?

  95. Re: Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Culture20 · · Score: 1

    Or just use rm -i in the beginning to scout out what's actually going to get borked first, then do CTRL+C and repeat without the -i if you're feeling confident.

    I wish rm had a dry-run option, like rsync does.

    That makes me wonder if there might be a dry-run executable that gives read only and fake write access to a process to let you watch what it might do.

  96. Ubuntu maybe, but Kubuntu on the other hand... by dargaud · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I've been using kubuntu everywhere: home, work and family computers. For the past few (at least 5) years, upgrades have been smooth with very few minor bugs since the kde3 -> kde4. But this time it's close to a disaster on the only machine I upgraded. They didn't do small incremental changes this time, they updated: kde4->kde5, qt4->qt5 (or the framework), whatever->systemd, lightdm->sddm.

    I think the latter is the cause of all the graphic problems I've been having. If I use the fglrx graphic driver (for AMD/ATI), I cannot sleep anymore (it wakes up to a black screen) and I don't have ctrl-alt-F consoles anymore. If I use the xserver-xorg-video-ati driver, I cannot unlock the screen (it loops back to sddm). Which makes having a laptop rather useless.

    And there are plenty of other issues: opened windows are lost between logins (or moved to random places, and always to the 1st desktop), all opened konsoles are lost, kate doesn't reopen files, some login screens are all white. Or all black. The date on the clock is too big and doesn't fit ! And one thing that ails me is that your preferences are not kept between KDE4 and 5. You have to spend an hour or way more to go through all the options to try and get the desktop the way you want it again.

    --
    Non-Linux Penguins ?
    1. Re:Ubuntu maybe, but Kubuntu on the other hand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use an nvidia card/driver and everything crashes randomly and frequently. I installed fresh to dodge the too many changes problem

    2. Re:Ubuntu maybe, but Kubuntu on the other hand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      oh and I some recommendations:

      force the DPI settings. For whatever reason, kde just fucks up fonts hardcore when using proprietary drivers. also I found that the kde version available in the kubuntu backports ppa is somewhat more stable than the 15.04 default version.

  97. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Funny. I somehow inherited a VMS-based application (probably because in days of yore I had experience with it), and had a task to perform on it. I think my fingers were literally trembling - far more so than when I was first learning it ages ago. All I could think of was just how much work I'd end up creating for myself if I messed anything up, on this system for which the last person who actually knew anything in detail left probably 10 years ago at least.

  98. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

    Enjoy your quiche.

    --
    Watch this Heartland Institute video
  99. Completely crashed my OpenVZ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm running on an old kernel (due in part to my openVZ instance) and the switch from upsert to systemd killed my system. I ended up having to scrap the server and re-install. So, kiddies, make sure your kernal is 3.4 or above!

  100. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean I don't need fdisk and dd anymore? There's something called GOOEY that can get me today where I want to go tomorrow (gparted)?

    Then there's the old dead farts that just stinks, because they're afraid to have their opinion changed. Those stuck in ed or even edlin and play BOFH because they think 50 Mb email should be enough for everyone.

    For server Debian has always rocked, and just does the job in most cases. Fedora / Red Hat if you're corporate and need the support (if you can get it!).
    For desktop, Ubuntu fares pretty well these days and just works for most tasks people can throw at it, requiring a few downloads of some "bad" and "ugly" bits of software for playing DVD and "avi"-files. Last time everything I needed was downloadable either through software manager or through the browser (Chrome), which now even supports Netflix out of the (downloading) box. It seems everything I care about could be turned off in security settings as well.
    Mint was promising, but never could upgrade nicely, at least not the Debian version, so am stuck with an unupgradable Mint on two computers I mean to replace with Ubuntu. (Note: I haven't tried regular Mint, which should be based on Ubuntu repositories)
    Most importantly: I think anybody can use Ubuntu these days, and usually everything works with a few clicks. No more hunting for drivers and silly addon software, especially now that Java is being removed from browser-space.

    This is true, until some other distro make inroads or Ubuntu / Canonical turns evil / lazy, which is inevitably bound to happen anyways. THIS, is what experience is for, avoiding sweaty long nights tweaking linux /etc/ text-files. If we can get an experience like Mac provided, but with the power and flexibility of Linux, it's worth the cost (free) IMHO. I can live with the non-free stuff until people "get it" and starts supporting Linux and freedom even more.

    Damn fine job Canonical did (clean 14.04). I've been there when they've screwed up as well (usually around major upgrade-time). As users, we deserve to be treated better, and hopefully the competition will be enough to make it happen.

    Windows? Out of 5 computers, 1 have Windows (VM). 3 of them just couldn't support the hardware anymore or the reinstallation didn't work / wasn't provided for that particular magical version of Windows license. How many are there? I have Ultimate Vista: only to be used with bundled PC. WTF is that good for? Then there is "Professional", "Home", "Media Center", "Starter" and that's just for starters (googling CE, 98, ME, 95, NT, 2000). Windows just doesn't work when the age of your computer exceeds 3-4 years, which it SHOULD if it's of any decent quality. mean WHO in their right minds thinks it's OK to buy and install / reconfigure a PC every second year??

    Windows stops working for your grandma, and then you need to install Ubuntu, which most probably WILL work out of the box these days (with a few clicks through the system settings). Funny story: The corporations knows about this, and seeks to confuse people with even more empty promises, but remains the same for the most part. Don't be fooled. Get smarter!

  101. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Jax+Omen · · Score: 1

    As I said, I'm a Linux noob.

    I have no idea how to do that, and switching to something that was more user-friendly out-of-the-box, so to speak, seemed easier.

    I don't have anything important on that machine anyway, it's just for having a portable non-phone web browser and 20+ year old games, basically. Hence the desire to not have to fuck with anything, just make it work and be user-friendly.

  102. May the 4th translation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of weeks ago canonical released ubuntu 15.04 a couple, and been a success, it seems that this release has. Mostly reporting a nice experience, the community is, which the first ubuntu release that uses systemd instead of upstart, is important since this is. At slashdot, been very nervous about systemd, people have, and even asked to say something nice about it, last year it was. To be fair, ubuntu 15.04 hasn't changed all that much. Been implemented, some minor visual changes have, with a couple of new features along, but remained pretty much the same, the operating system has. Most importantly, stable, is it, fast, and it lacks the usual problems accompanied by new releases. Yeesssssss. May the 4th be with you.

  103. Nervous? by LesFerg · · Score: 1

    "At Slashdot, people have been very nervous about systemd"

    I want a fucking t-shirt with that on it.

    --
    If I had a DeLorean... I would probably only drive it from time to time.
  104. Re: Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by kimhanse · · Score: 1

    I have hosed a system once when cleaning up /etc/ after having finished a day of installation and configuration. "rm *~" became "rm *" as ~ was right next to Enter on my keyboard.

    Using sudo would not have saved me from that mistake. Now I always write *~ as ~<left arrow>*.

  105. Re: Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I really like this post from so long ago. I reread it every once in a while. It's quite long but will give you some idea of the power of root.

    https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.sys.next.sysadmin/iEhM7_Bn_vA

  106. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by DougPaulson · · Score: 1

    walterbyrd: "Ubuntu used to be awesome, now it sucks. If you have to advertised how well Ubuntu is doing, it's probably not doing all that well."

    Try the lightweight LXDE Desktop Environment or one of Unity, Cinnamon, MATE, KDE or Xfce, you do have a choice ref

  107. Re: Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can also use rm -I, which will ask for confirmation before running (just once for each command, unlike -i) if you try to delete a directory or more than three files. If you fear typos, it's a good precaution to take when typing.

    (For what its worth, my worst rm-related typo was rm * in my home directory, rather than the intended rm *~; this isn't so bad because there's no -r in there, but it took a while to figure out what files were stored in my home directory directly and if any of them were important.)

  108. Nonsense. by msobkow · · Score: 1

    One does not edit anywhere near the number of configuration files and install enough software to justify running as root all the time by a long shot. This isn't the Windows world where over half the software requires running as Administrator just to function.

    I spend months at a time never touching the root account on my systems after they've been set up. I haven't seen a box that enabled root logins in over a decade, from any vendor or Unix flavour.

    So I call "bullshit" on the theory that there are users out there logging in as "root" for the sake of "convenience."

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    1. Re:Nonsense. by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      I have seen users running a file manager as root (technically, it's a gksudo) which I found offensive, but well they got the read/write rights on the disk they needed to read from and write to.

  109. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, I'm sure he try{ ed.

    finally{ , mod me up.

  110. really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this ranks among the most unstable releases I've ever had and I installed fresh on all my devices for this release

  111. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Ash-Fox · · Score: 2

    sudo -s will give you privileges without changing your environment variables, such as $HOME. sudo -i acts as if you are logging into the root account.

    It depends on what your particular needs are.

    --
    Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  112. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

    What exactly is bad about sudo su -?

    You're making use of two completely separate applications that are intended for privilege escalation, which is not only silly but wasteful. It's possible on some systems that su and sudo have different setups (usually su is completely disabled on 'secured' systems) and so you may not even be able to bring up the shell you had intended to begin with.

    If you want to use 'su', use it in it's proper form and use 'su -', if you want to use 'sudo' use it in it's proper form and use 'sudo -i'. Using both is just ridiculous.

    --
    Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  113. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    As I said, I'm a Linux noob.

    As a noob I highly recommend you search for quick answers before completely blowing off an entire distro in the future. I mean go your hardest and do whatever you want, but in some cases there are not only people out there with the same use case as you, but people who have made it trivially easy.

    In Ubuntu just typing the following:
    sudo apt-get install xubuntu-desktop

    will download and completely change the desktop environment to XFCE for you. Likewise "sudo apt-get install kubuntu-desktop" will download and switch the environment to KDE.

  114. One step forward, two steps back... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Once again there has been a little bit of progress, 15.04 marks the first time I have not had to use the -nomodeset flag in the boot options to get a usable desktop. Unfortunately, this release is not without issues:

    1.) Teamviewer 10 no longer works, desktop appears black or frozen when trying to view Ubuntu 15.04 from a remote machine.
    2.) Upgrade from 14.04 to 15.04 failed and required a full wipe of the system and clean install.
    3.) Still no option to run as sudo from the launcher, thereby requiring non-obvious editing of .desktop files to get software to launch that was installed from the Software Center.

  115. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

    Yet it's very easy to enable the root account and disable sudo (by kicking everyone out of the sudoers), and install openssh-server. Here's it, a powerful and dead easy multi-user machine.

  116. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by bobbomo · · Score: 1

    I've installed Ubuntu OEM on a few computers old before giving them away.

    https://help.ubuntu.com/commun...

  117. Re: Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

    I have installed systems where the user name, user password, host name and root password were all the same.

  118. Re: Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

    Wow, the qwerty layout is evil.
    To get a /, I need to press shift ; the key is the second-from-right one from shift, not first one ; enter/return key is of the rotated L variety (it's possible to press * and enter in one mistaken movement, though)

    Never knew half the data disasters on the planet were caused by a one-keypress / next to a return key lol.

  119. Re: Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

    The worst command is rm .*, because it's one you might want to run on purpose. And it does work if you're logged in as the regular user!

  120. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

    SystemD is ubiquitous (UBUNTU, SUSE, Debian, RedHat, and others). What has to now happen is to accept SystemD and to criticize and improve upon some of the service commands.

    --
    Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
  121. Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks by davydagger · · Score: 1
    It really depends. What do you want out of your desktop. If you want it to "just work", stick with the default mint desktop, and let automatic updates simply update your machine when it tells you.

    Firefox and chromium work just as well on linux as windows, and those are your only too browsers that you should give a fuck about. Also, VLC is in most major repos, and works just as well on linux.

    Stick with mint. In fact. I'd simply install the LTS version, and upgrade when you change PCs.