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.
I'm on Kubuntu 15.04, NUC with intel graphics. Everything just works including suspend right out of the gate. Love it.
Congratulations for specifically missing the entire point of the article.
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.
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.
A Softpedia article gets linked to Slashdot story these days; can Slash-vertisement get any lower than this?
A friendly reminder that if you hate Unity, Ubuntu also supports KDE, Xfce, LXDE, Enlightenment, Cinnamon, GNOME Shell, MATE, and the CLI.
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.
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.
>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
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.
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".
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.
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)
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.
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
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.
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.
It "works", but sudo bash doesn't run bash with the login option.
Use sudo su -
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.
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.
Ok.
$ nice bash
$
Happy now?
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.
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.
i last logged in to root on redhat9. i learned my lesson.
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
How about sudo -i?
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.
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?
Im pretty sure that ubuntu uses dash, not bash.
You can use bash, but things may behave abnormally.
noobs deserve freedom too.
Also, I recommend mint for noobs. Much easier, less fail.
But why?
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.
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.
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...
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.
Pfft. I don't even used systems that don't come with systemd and Gnome 3 by default.
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.
Remember that even Windows has had working hibernate for only 15 years. It takes a while to catch up.
I'm pretty sure the entire point of the article was that a good systemd flamewar is good for the hit count.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
.. 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.
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.
Yep; absolutely. Just as good. I think it wasn't there when I learned my trick.
Why not?
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
why not
sudo -i
This gives a root shell
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/...
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.
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.
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.
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.........
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.
Seriously, stop spreading bad practice. The proper practice is "sudo -i".
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
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.
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.
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.
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.
bad practice?
What exactly is bad about sudo su -?
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)
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
Mint is not just for noobs.
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.
You sound like a Fedora user.
I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
Or perhaps it could just prompt for a password on installation like any reasonable distro does?
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.
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
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
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.
systemd is underwritten - if not actually written - by Red Hat.
Given their cozy, lucrative government contracts, I trust Red Hat even less than Microsoft.
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...
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
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
Isn't the correct command "sudo -s"?
- Raynet --> .
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.
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.
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 ?
Enjoy your quiche.
Watch this Heartland Institute video
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.
"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.
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>*.
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.
Why is sudo su bad practice compared to sudo -i ?
(I am asking because I really don't know and would like to)
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.
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).
http://askubuntu.com/a/376386
MouseClass extends ScrollClass, which extends TabClass, which extends SidebarClass, which extends PowerClass, w
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
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.
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.
Excellent example.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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 -" ?
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.
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.
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
You're confusing the terminal for the desktop.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Fuck it, I'll do ssh root@localhost!
I'm sure that does the trick to please the login gods.
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.
I've installed Ubuntu OEM on a few computers old before giving them away.
https://help.ubuntu.com/commun...
I have installed systems where the user name, user password, host name and root password were all the same.
Wow, the qwerty layout is evil. /, 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)
To get a
Never knew half the data disasters on the planet were caused by a one-keypress / next to a return key lol.
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!
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?
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
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.
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.
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.