actually, if you had spend more than 5 minutes looking at windows you would know how easy it is to set up an unattended install disk, complete with your software, settings, etc.
Install disk? we just use copy and paste. (takes about 5 minutes for homogeneous installs with reasonable HDDs)
wait so users being able to use there computers is now a problem? I fail to see the problem with allowing a user who has access to a console to execute scripts, if they cant be trusted with a terminal its pretty easy to not let them have it.
Hasn't luks been able to do that for years?, i know it was an option when i first installed ubuntu 3-4 years ago, since then I've realized there is nothing i want to keep secret enough to take a performance hit.
Re-read what I wrote. Do you understand the term "opt-out"? I know how to opt out.
options: 1) upsetting people like you 2) millions of unpatched browsers ready for exploiting Ill piss you off to keep the majority of people safe any day of the week, and once a release is made only security patches & bug fixes are applied, IMHO that is the best way to do releases.
Have a look at oldbar and hideunvisited.
why dont you just use the extentions and forget about the fact you dont like the default, which most people like.
Apparently you don't like people opening up their own downloaded documents either. At least not in IE. Why is it that Firefox sets this obscure stream to mark something as downloaded, but then itself does not honour the flag it sets.
wtf are you on about? this has nothing to do with security or downloaded documents, are you complaining about the wierd way that firefox saves html sites? If so then yes it is abit retarded, but your free to improve it.
Ah yes because all security holes are plugged before they make it into the wild. By the way I was using the latest version of firefox at the time (2.0.something).
The latest version would have been 2.0.x where the x represents security patches. from my experience most adware crap is installed by other software and then put into your firefox profile, however if you don't go on unsafe sites you don't get adware anyway.
have you ever looked into coding an extension for FF? It's horrid horrid stuff
No actually, it's not. It's more flexible, but it's not "better" by any means. XUL is a piece of trash.
Erm you can make simple extensions in just plain old javascript, if you want to mess around with the internal or interface of a program then your going to have to get your hands dirty.
IOW, "You could not have developed this code if the taxpayer did not subsidize it, therefore the taxpayer owns it, not you, and you now have to pay a $50/year tax to use it. Obviously, since you did not own it, you could not copyright it, and the GPL is null and void,
He supports universal healthcare, for example, but can not accept that it's general failure is due to a design and not implementation flaw.
If you meant multi-process, I agree that it should be a long term goal, but think their is little point in screwing up everybody's extensions until your ready to do it right (separate processes, with separate rights, for networking, rendering & interface). caching crashing tabs can be done in threads (theirs no benifit in using processes AFAIK) and while the OS does provide some security benefits i don't think these are as critical as your making out. The performance problem you talk about is probably best dealt with in threads and there is a significant improvement in 3.1, but its not ideal.
I do agree that certain useless features should be extensions *cough*ubiquity*cough*(possibly installed by default), unfortunately it seams that there is more chance of this coming from a fork than from mozilla
really? try compact-menus (works up to 3.2 alpha) + fission (works up to 3.1), i have the entire browser interface down to 1 line. Perhaps tabs at the top would be a nice option tho, but it could cause major problems on window manager that use their windows decorations. Personally id like fission integrated into the browser, but only enabled by default on macs (where statusbars are not the norm), but im sure others disagree so while the extension works ill be happy.
You shouldn't have to dig in about:config to disable a prominent feature.
erm yes you should, its a feature acording to the people that make the browser, they are being nice offering you a way to disable it. If you want it off by default then in the words of slashchan "fork or GTFO". (p.s if you just want a light gecko browser try epiphany)
Im using 3.2alpha and was on 3.1b for a while i think memory usage has improved slightly from 3.0, hell its not as slow/sluggish on Linux, but 1.1GB sounds pretty excessive i think your using at-least 1 shitty extension OR that firefox is eating your memory because its there and there's plenty free so the OS doesn't ask it to stop.
I do not have this problem, nor have i heard of it, are you sure its not your mouse? I suggest filing a bug report to group these anecdotes and try and figure out what the cause is?
Just get Dick "why are you such a dick?" Cheny to touch them. He didn't have to ask google to blur out his house its just impossible to get a clear image of the place.
what's to stop somebody from conning you into clicking a mass computing (see botnet above) cloud masked by a fun but pointless flash game people could enjoy for hours on end?
I think adobe have done some pretty impressive work to stop that from happening.
Its a shame the "best source for information" keeps dying and being replaced, a good wiki is all thats needed. Hell play about with mediawiki and you could probably put up one wikipage with tabs to display distro specific details underneath a generic guide to the software.
What about a hardware store? showing off and linking to the latest Linux hardware deployments and Linux supported hardware?
Also: *news & articles (like the old linux.com, not just newsvac) covering the kernel, server & desktop developments *NOT a major forum (there are plenty another just spreads the chance of you coming across somebody knowledgeable enough to fix your problem thinner) *PERHAPS: A wiki (that is mainly based around merging the less distro specific stuff from gentoo,arch & other wikis) *A parody of getthefacts that just plain laughs at microsoft.
Slashdot Mirror
rsync, there are better ways but to answer your questions you only need rsync.
how would you stop users installing flash to .mozilla/plugins/? does noexec cover you there or is there another trick?
actually, if you had spend more than 5 minutes looking at windows you would know how easy it is to set up an unattended install disk, complete with your software, settings, etc.
Install disk? we just use copy and paste. (takes about 5 minutes for homogeneous installs with reasonable HDDs)
wait so users being able to use there computers is now a problem? I fail to see the problem with allowing a user who has access to a console to execute scripts, if they cant be trusted with a terminal its pretty easy to not let them have it.
1) no its not, try mount -o noexec,nosuid,nodev /etc ...
2) how is being abble to read system configs a problem?
3) it can be solved with chmod -R o-rwx
yeah but then you just restore their home from an lvm snapshot, give them a slap, and tell them not to do it again.
don't give them root!
Hasn't luks been able to do that for years?, i know it was an option when i first installed ubuntu 3-4 years ago, since then I've realized there is nothing i want to keep secret enough to take a performance hit.
Nnah, it was in the princes Diana memorial edition.
65 external usb drives?
ctrl+shift+p (in 3.1 and later) ftw no nobody will ever no that i go on www.oldgaymen.com for mt pr0n
Re-read what I wrote. Do you understand the term "opt-out"? I know how to opt out.
options:
1) upsetting people like you
2) millions of unpatched browsers ready for exploiting
Ill piss you off to keep the majority of people safe any day of the week, and once a release is made only security patches & bug fixes are applied, IMHO that is the best way to do releases.
Have a look at oldbar and hideunvisited.
why dont you just use the extentions and forget about the fact you dont like the default, which most people like.
Apparently you don't like people opening up their own downloaded documents either. At least not in IE. Why is it that Firefox sets this obscure stream to mark something as downloaded, but then itself does not honour the flag it sets.
wtf are you on about? this has nothing to do with security or downloaded documents, are you complaining about the wierd way that firefox saves html sites? If so then yes it is abit retarded, but your free to improve it.
Ah yes because all security holes are plugged before they make it into the wild. By the way I was using the latest version of firefox at the time (2.0.something).
The latest version would have been 2.0.x where the x represents security patches. from my experience most adware crap is installed by other software and then put into your firefox profile, however if you don't go on unsafe sites you don't get adware anyway.
have you ever looked into coding an extension for FF? It's horrid horrid stuff
No actually, it's not. It's more flexible, but it's not "better" by any means. XUL is a piece of trash.
Erm you can make simple extensions in just plain old javascript, if you want to mess around with the internal or interface of a program then your going to have to get your hands dirty.
If you don't like Firefox DON'T FUCKING USE IT.
YOU sir, are the troll.
esc + f5 ftw
insightful my ass.
IOW, "You could not have developed this code if the taxpayer did not subsidize it, therefore the taxpayer owns it, not you, and you now have to pay a $50/year tax to use it. Obviously, since you did not own it, you could not copyright it, and the GPL is null and void,
He supports universal healthcare, for example, but can not accept that it's general failure is due to a design and not implementation flaw.
pure bullshit
If they used EXT2 and bundled EXT2IFS with their windows app
Lets see if you read it this time
ps -AT | grep firefox ...
27559 27559 ? 00:00:00 firefox
27574 27574 ? 00:01:42 firefox-bin
27574 27721 ? 00:00:00 firefox-bin
27574 27744 ? 00:00:00 firefox-bin
If you meant multi-process, I agree that it should be a long term goal, but think their is little point in screwing up everybody's extensions until your ready to do it right (separate processes, with separate rights, for networking, rendering & interface). caching crashing tabs can be done in threads (theirs no benifit in using processes AFAIK) and while the OS does provide some security benefits i don't think these are as critical as your making out. The performance problem you talk about is probably best dealt with in threads and there is a significant improvement in 3.1, but its not ideal.
I do agree that certain useless features should be extensions *cough*ubiquity*cough*(possibly installed by default), unfortunately it seams that there is more chance of this coming from a fork than from mozilla
really? try compact-menus (works up to 3.2 alpha) + fission (works up to 3.1), i have the entire browser interface down to 1 line. Perhaps tabs at the top would be a nice option tho, but it could cause major problems on window manager that use their windows decorations. Personally id like fission integrated into the browser, but only enabled by default on macs (where statusbars are not the norm), but im sure others disagree so while the extension works ill be happy.
You shouldn't have to dig in about:config to disable a prominent feature.
erm yes you should, its a feature acording to the people that make the browser, they are being nice offering you a way to disable it. If you want it off by default then in the words of slashchan "fork or GTFO". (p.s if you just want a light gecko browser try epiphany)
Im using 3.2alpha and was on 3.1b for a while i think memory usage has improved slightly from 3.0, hell its not as slow/sluggish on Linux, but 1.1GB sounds pretty excessive i think your using at-least 1 shitty extension OR that firefox is eating your memory because its there and there's plenty free so the OS doesn't ask it to stop.
I do not have this problem, nor have i heard of it, are you sure its not your mouse?
I suggest filing a bug report to group these anecdotes and try and figure out what the cause is?
Just get Dick "why are you such a dick?" Cheny to touch them. He didn't have to ask google to blur out his house its just impossible to get a clear image of the place.
what's to stop somebody from conning you into clicking a mass computing (see botnet above) cloud masked by a fun but pointless flash game people could enjoy for hours on end?
I think adobe have done some pretty impressive work to stop that from happening.
but you can find 41 idiots with webbrowsers in the time it take you to find 1 preapared to install something.
Its a shame the "best source for information" keeps dying and being replaced, a good wiki is all thats needed. Hell play about with mediawiki and you could probably put up one wikipage with tabs to display distro specific details underneath a generic guide to the software.
What about a hardware store? showing off and linking to the latest Linux hardware deployments and Linux supported hardware?
Also:
*news & articles (like the old linux.com, not just newsvac) covering the kernel, server & desktop developments
*NOT a major forum (there are plenty another just spreads the chance of you coming across somebody knowledgeable enough to fix your problem thinner)
*PERHAPS: A wiki (that is mainly based around merging the less distro specific stuff from gentoo,arch & other wikis)
*A parody of getthefacts that just plain laughs at microsoft.