General Linux Chat and Small Questions v. I broke my Arch Install

[shodan]

Ugh I fucking hate Aptitude I've had nothing but issues with it.
Why won't it install php-gd!?

root@Antarctica:/srv/www/School.BasBieling.com/public_html# apt-get install php5-gd
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree       
Reading state information... Done
The following extra packages will be installed:
  libgd2-xpm libx11-6 libxcb1 libxpm4
Suggested packages:
  libgd-tools
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  libgd2-xpm libx11-6 libxcb1 libxpm4 php5-gd
0 upgraded, 5 newly installed, 0 to remove and 51 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B/1267 kB of archives.
After this operation, 2627 kB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue [Y/n]? 
perl: warning: Setting locale failed.
perl: warning: Please check that your locale settings:
	LANGUAGE = (unset),
	LC_ALL = (unset),
	LANG = "en_US.utf8"
    are supported and installed on your system.
perl: warning: Falling back to the standard locale ("C").
locale: Cannot set LC_CTYPE to default locale: No such file or directory
locale: Cannot set LC_MESSAGES to default locale: No such file or directory
locale: Cannot set LC_ALL to default locale: No such file or directory
debconf: unable to initialize frontend: Dialog
debconf: (No usable dialog-like program is installed, so the dialog based frontend cannot be used. at /usr/share/perl5/Debconf/FrontEnd/Dialog.pm line 76, <> line 5.)
debconf: falling back to frontend: Readline
Selecting previously unselected package libxcb1:amd64.
(Reading database ... 27893 files and directories currently installed.)
Unpacking libxcb1:amd64 (from .../libxcb1_1.8.1-2+deb7u1_amd64.deb) ...
Selecting previously unselected package libx11-6:amd64.
Unpacking libx11-6:amd64 (from .../libx11-6_2%3a1.5.0-1+deb7u1_amd64.deb) ...
Selecting previously unselected package libxpm4:amd64.
Unpacking libxpm4:amd64 (from .../libxpm4_1%3a3.5.10-1_amd64.deb) ...
Selecting previously unselected package libgd2-xpm:amd64.
Unpacking libgd2-xpm:amd64 (from .../libgd2-xpm_2.0.36~rc1~dfsg-6.1_amd64.deb) ...
Selecting previously unselected package php5-gd.
Unpacking php5-gd (from .../php5-gd_5.4.4-14+deb7u5_amd64.deb) ...
Processing triggers for libapache2-mod-php5 ...
[ ok ] Reloading web server config: apache2.
dpkg: error processing libxcb1:amd64 (--configure):
 package libxcb1:amd64 1.8.1-2+deb7u1 cannot be configured because libxcb1:i386 is at a different version (1.8.1-2)
dpkg: error processing libx11-6:amd64 (--configure):
 package libx11-6:amd64 2:1.5.0-1+deb7u1 cannot be configured because libx11-6:i386 is at a different version (2:1.5.0-1)
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libxpm4:amd64:
 libxpm4:amd64 depends on libx11-6; however:
  Package libx11-6:amd64 is not configured yet.

dpkg: error processing libxpm4:amd64 (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libgd2-xpm:amd64:
 libgd2-xpm:amd64 depends on libx11-6; however:
  Package libx11-6:amd64 is not configured yet.
 libgd2-xpm:amd64 depends on libxpm4; however:
  Package libxpm4:amd64 is not configured yet.

dpkg: error processing libgd2-xpm:amd64 (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of php5-gd:
 php5-gd depends on libgd2-xpm (>= 2.0.36~rc1~dfsg); however:
  Package libgd2-xpm:amd64 is not configured yet.
 php5-gd depends on libx11-6; however:
  Package libx11-6:amd64 is not configured yet.
 php5-gd depends on libxpm4; however:
  Package libxpm4:amd64 is not configured yet.

dpkg: error processing php5-gd (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
Errors were encountered while processing:
 libxcb1:amd64
 libx11-6:amd64
 libxpm4:amd64
 libgd2-xpm:amd64
 php5-gd
E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)

[editline]13th November 2013[/editline]

also why does facepunch think I'm running windows 7 :/

[Comfy]

[QUOTE=Mega1mpact;42848569]Ugh I fucking hate Aptitude I've had nothing but issues with it.
Why won't it install php-gd!?

<code>

[editline]13th November 2013[/editline]

also why does facepunch think I'm running windows 7 :/[/QUOTE]

package libxcb1:amd64 1.8.1-2+deb7u1 cannot be configured because libxcb1:i386 is at a different version (1.8.1-2)

And

package libx11-6:amd64 2:1.5.0-1+deb7u1 cannot be configured because libx11-6:i386 is at a different version (2:1.5.0-1)

[shodan]

yea but how can I make it ignore the version difference or something?

[Comfy]

apt sometimes is really flawed.

[editline]13th November 2013[/editline]

[QUOTE=Mega1mpact;42848604]yea but how can I make it ignore the version difference or something?[/QUOTE]

Compile the versions needed from source?

[shodan]

ugh that means I have to go out and get the correct versions and compile them by hand. I honestly don't have time for that right now because I have to get that extension up and running in within 2 hours.

Fucking aptitude I never have any issues with yum. I only have issues and nothing but issues with apt

[Quarternions]

Maybe a bit of a stupid question but I am fairly new to linux / apache in general. I want to create a management interface with php using the shell_exec command. Disabling safe mode isn't the problem, the problem is that I only want one specific virtual host (my management interface website) to be allowed to work without the safe mode and the rest of the websites need to keep working in safe mode.

Is there any way to do ths ?

[shodan]

ini_set('safe_mode', 0)

Put that at the top of the page. Turn on safe mode in the php.ini

[Quarternions]

[QUOTE=Mega1mpact;42850798]

ini_set('safe_mode', 0)

Put that at the top of the page. Turn on safe mode in the php.ini[/QUOTE]

Does that mean that any client (none yet but soon I will be giving some friends some hosting space) can just put that on top of their php file and execute crap on my linux box ?

[diwako]

Getting more comfortable with Linux now. Still have some questions tho.

1)
Possible to upgrade from Ubuntu 12.04 LTS to latest Ubuntu version? (want me some Gnome 3.6+)

2)
Do I actually need an AV like in windows?

3)
Possible to run Windows Programs that are not ported to Linux or have an alternative?

[vlad]

[QUOTE=diwako;42851083]Getting more comfortable with Linux now. Still have some questions tho.

1)
Possible to upgrade from Ubuntu 12.04 LTS to latest Ubuntu version? (want me some Gnome 3.6+)

2)
Do I actually need an AV like in windows?

3)
Possible to run Windows Programs that are not ported to Linux or have an alternative?[/QUOTE]

2)
in my experience, no, not really.

3)
install wine. some programs may function slowly though considering that wine is an emulator.

[supervoltage]

[QUOTE=PredGD;42851156]2)
in my experience, no, not really.

3)
install wine. some programs may function slowly though considering that wine is an emulator.[/QUOTE]

WINE - Wine Is Not an Emulator

It's a compatibility layer which allows Windows programs to understand the Linux kernel.

[mastersrp]

[QUOTE=supervoltage;42851204]WINE - Wine Is Not an Emulator

It's a compatibility layer which allows Windows programs to understand the Linux kernel.[/QUOTE]

Actually this isn't entirely true. It allows Windows programs to not give a fuck that they're running on the Linux kernel, because to them it looks like a Windows environment. They don't know that it's the Linux kernel, and make the same kernel and dll calls as on Windows, these calls are mostly being redirected and translated. That's the rought explanation.

[nikomo]

[QUOTE=quincy18;42850669]Maybe a bit of a stupid question but I am fairly new to linux / apache in general. I want to create a management interface with php using the shell_exec command.[/QUOTE]

Ugh, just be careful not to pass any variables from GET or POST directly to shell_exec, not even after escaping them.

It's much better to define $command = "whatever" and then shell_exec that, than shell_exec("whatever" + $_GET) and give literally everyone free access to your server.

[editline]13th November 2013[/editline]

[QUOTE=mastersrp;42851275]Actually this isn't entirely true. It allows Windows programs to not give a fuck that they're running on the Linux kernel, because to them it looks like a Windows environment. They don't know that it's the Linux kernel, and make the same kernel and dll calls as on Windows, these calls are mostly being redirected and translated. That's the rought explanation.[/QUOTE]

You just gave the definition of a compatibility layer.

[HubmaN]

[QUOTE=nikomo;42851444]
You just gave the definition of a compatibility layer.[/QUOTE]

I believe he's disagreeing with the next part of your explanation - "understanding the Linux kernel", as opposed to something that reverses the doer and the modified - "wrapping the Linux kernel to interfaces Windows programs are compiled for" (in the same way certain library calls eventually bottom out as a series of syscalls made), or something entirely more specific than that.

[Darkwater]

[QUOTE=diwako;42851083]Getting more comfortable with Linux now. Still have some questions tho.

1)
Possible to upgrade from Ubuntu 12.04 LTS to latest Ubuntu version? (want me some Gnome 3.6+)

2)
Do I actually need an AV like in windows?

3)
Possible to run Windows Programs that are not ported to Linux or have an alternative?[/QUOTE]

You can use sudo apt-get dist-upgrade but it's safer to just back everything up and start over with a fresh ubuntu installation.

[Quarternions]

[QUOTE=nikomo;42851444]Ugh, just be careful not to pass any variables from GET or POST directly to shell_exec, not even after escaping them.

It's much better to define $command = "whatever" and then shell_exec that, than shell_exec("whatever" + $_GET) and give literally everyone free access to your server.

[editline]13th November 2013[/editline]

You just gave the definition of a compatibility layer.[/QUOTE]

Well it is supposed to be a private management panel and I won't put any malicious stuff in it but I am worried that other people who are going to use the machine can also use the shell_exec, is there any way to just allow one website / user to shell_exec ?

[nikomo]

[QUOTE=quincy18;42852155]Well it is supposed to be a private management panel and I won't put any malicious stuff in it but I am worried that other people who are going to use the machine can also use the shell_exec, is there any way to just allow one website / user to shell_exec ?[/QUOTE]

If you're allowing other people to upload custom code, and run it under the privileges of another user with more access than their own user has, you've already fucked up your security so badly, no amount of fucking with the config files will help you.

[Rockman1811]

[QUOTE=diwako;42851083]Getting more comfortable with Linux now. Still have some questions tho.

1)
Possible to upgrade from Ubuntu 12.04 LTS to latest Ubuntu version? (want me some Gnome 3.6+)
[/QUOTE]

Go to software & updates and under Notify me of a new Ubuntu version, click "For any new version"

[editline]13th November 2013[/editline]

So here are the specs for that throwaway. It originaly had LXDE on it but I didn't like the look of it

[t]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/63660484/Facepunch%20shit/Screenshot%20-%20111313%20-%2013-01-30.png[/t]

also, I misread the RAM readout.

[Demache]

[QUOTE=Megaman1811;42854482]Go to software & updates and under Notify me of a new Ubuntu version, click "For any new version"

[editline]13th November 2013[/editline]

So here are the specs for that throwaway. It originaly had LXDE on it but I didn't like the look of it

[t]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/63660484/Facepunch%20shit/Screenshot%20-%20111313%20-%2013-01-30.png[/t]

also, I misread the RAM readout.[/QUOTE]

Interesting. It has less usable RAM than my Pentium II box. Is it because some of it is used for integrated graphics?

Still, 512 MB would be pretty decent for 2004.

[larikang]

[QUOTE=XxThreedogxX;42846484]I cannot no matter how hard I try wrap my head around the Arch setup process. Maybe I've picked the wrong hobby.[/QUOTE]
It can seem overwhelming but it essentially amounts to:

1. Partition disk
2. Format partitions
3. Mount partitions
4. Install packages
5. Install bootloader
6. Configure stuff

It gets tricky because some steps offer many choices and you need to understand what you want. The nice thing about it is that you don't have to do it all at once. You can stop at any point and resume later using the live media, or scrap some of your work and go back to do an earlier step differently.

[shodan]

Have I expressed my [highlight]HATE[/highlight] for aptitude yet? I JUST want to install something. Why does it have to be like this?
Why

sudo apt-get install imagemagick-common 
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree       
Reading state information... Done
imagemagick-common is already the newest version.
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 50 not upgraded.
22 not fully installed or removed.
After this operation, 0 B of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue [Y/n]? 
perl: warning: Setting locale failed.
perl: warning: Please check that your locale settings:
	LANGUAGE = (unset),
	LC_ALL = (unset),
	LANG = "en_GB.utf8"
    are supported and installed on your system.
perl: warning: Falling back to the standard locale ("C").
locale: Cannot set LC_CTYPE to default locale: No such file or directory
locale: Cannot set LC_MESSAGES to default locale: No such file or directory
locale: Cannot set LC_ALL to default locale: No such file or directory
dpkg: error processing libxcb1:amd64 (--configure):
 package libxcb1:amd64 1.8.1-2+deb7u1 cannot be configured because libxcb1:i386 is at a different version (1.8.1-2)
dpkg: error processing libx11-6:amd64 (--configure):
 package libx11-6:amd64 2:1.5.0-1+deb7u1 cannot be configured because libx11-6:i386 is at a different version (2:1.5.0-1)
dpkg: error processing libxcb-render0:amd64 (--configure):
 package libxcb-render0:amd64 1.8.1-2+deb7u1 cannot be configured because libxcb-render0:i386 is at a different version (1.8.1-2)
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libxcb-shm0:amd64:
 libxcb-shm0:amd64 depends on libxcb1; however:
  Package libxcb1:amd64 is not configured yet.

dpkg: error processing libxcb-shm0:amd64 (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: error processing libxrender1:amd64 (--configure):
 package libxrender1:amd64 1:0.9.7-1+deb7u1 cannot be configured because libxrender1:i386 is at a different version (1:0.9.7-1)
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libcairo2:amd64:
 libcairo2:amd64 depends on libx11-6; however:
  Package libx11-6:amd64 is not configured yet.
 libcairo2:amd64 depends on libxcb-render0; however:
  Package libxcb-render0:amd64 is not configured yet.
 libcairo2:amd64 depends on libxcb-shm0; however:
  Package libxcb-shm0:amd64 is not configured yet.
 libcairo2:amd64 depends on libxcb1 (>= 1.6); however:
  Package libxcb1:amd64 is not configured yet.
 libcairo2:amd64 depends on libxrender1; however:
  Package libxrender1:amd64 is not configured yet.

dpkg: error processing libcairo2:amd64 (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: error processing libcups2:amd64 (--configure):
 package libcups2:amd64 1.5.3-5+deb7u1 cannot be configured because libcups2:i386 is at a different version (1.5.3-5)
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libcupsimage2:amd64:
 libcupsimage2:amd64 depends on libcups2 (= 1.5.3-5+deb7u1); however:
  Package libcups2:amd64 is not configured yet.

dpkg: error processing libcupsimage2:amd64 (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libxft2:amd64:
 libxft2:amd64 depends on libx11-6; however:
  Package libx11-6:amd64 is not configured yet.
 libxft2:amd64 depends on libxrender1; however:
  Package libxrender1:amd64 is not configured yet.

dpkg: error processing libxft2:amd64 (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libpango1.0-0:amd64:
 libpango1.0-0:amd64 depends on libcairo2 (>= 1.8.10-3); however:
  Package libcairo2:amd64 is not configured yet.
 libpango1.0-0:amd64 depends on libx11-6; however:
  Package libx11-6:amd64 is not configured yet.
 libpango1.0-0:amd64 depends on libxft2 (>> 2.1.1); however:
  Package libxft2:amd64 is not configured yet.
 libpango1.0-0:amd64 depends on libxrender1; however:
  Package libxrender1:amd64 is not configured yet.

dpkg: error processing libpango1.0-0:amd64 (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libgdk-pixbuf2.0-0:amd64:
 libgdk-pixbuf2.0-0:amd64 depends on libx11-6; however:
  Package libx11-6:amd64 is not configured yet.

dpkg: error processing libgdk-pixbuf2.0-0:amd64 (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of librsvg2-2:amd64:
 librsvg2-2:amd64 depends on libcairo2 (>= 1.2.4); however:
  Package libcairo2:amd64 is not configured yet.
 librsvg2-2:amd64 depends on libgdk-pixbuf2.0-0 (>= 2.22.0); however:
  Package libgdk-pixbuf2.0-0:amd64 is not configured yet.
 librsvg2-2:amd64 depends on libpango1.0-0 (>= 1.18.0); however:
  Package libpango1.0-0:amd64 is not configured yet.

dpkg: error processing librsvg2-2:amd64 (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of librsvg2-common:amd64:
 librsvg2-common:amd64 depends on libgdk-pixbuf2.0-0 (>= 2.22.0); however:
  Package libgdk-pixbuf2.0-0:amd64 is not configured yet.
 librsvg2-common:amd64 depends on librsvg2-2 (= 2.36.1-1); however:
  Package librsvg2-2:amd64 is not configured yet.

dpkg: error processing librsvg2-common:amd64 (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: error processing libxext6:amd64 (--configure):
 package libxext6:amd64 2:1.3.1-2+deb7u1 cannot be configured because libxext6:i386 is at a different version (2:1.3.1-2)
dpkg: error processing libxt6:amd64 (--configure):
 package libxt6:amd64 1:1.1.3-1+deb7u1 cannot be configured because libxt6:i386 is at a different version (1:1.1.3-1)
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libmagickcore5:amd64:
 libmagickcore5:amd64 depends on libx11-6; however:
  Package libx11-6:amd64 is not configured yet.
 libmagickcore5:amd64 depends on libxext6; however:
  Package libxext6:amd64 is not configured yet.
 libmagickcore5:amd64 depends on libxt6; however:
  Package libxt6:amd64 is not configured yet.

dpkg: error processing libmagickcore5:amd64 (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libmagickwand5:amd64:
 libmagickwand5:amd64 depends on libmagickcore5 (>= 8:6.7.7.10); however:
  Package libmagickcore5:amd64 is not configured yet.
 libmagickwand5:amd64 depends on libx11-6; however:
  Package libx11-6:amd64 is not configured yet.
 libmagickwand5:amd64 depends on libxext6; however:
  Package libxext6:amd64 is not configured yet.
 libmagickwand5:amd64 depends on libxt6; however:
  Package libxt6:amd64 is not configured yet.

dpkg: error processing libmagickwand5:amd64 (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libwmf0.2-7:amd64:
 libwmf0.2-7:amd64 depends on libgdk-pixbuf2.0-0 (>= 2.22.0); however:
  Package libgdk-pixbuf2.0-0:amd64 is not configured yet.
 libwmf0.2-7:amd64 depends on libx11-6; however:
  Package libx11-6:amd64 is not configured yet.

dpkg: error processing libwmf0.2-7:amd64 (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libmagickcore5-extra:amd64:
 libmagickcore5-extra:amd64 depends on libcairo2 (>= 1.6.0); however:
  Package libcairo2:amd64 is not configured yet.
 libmagickcore5-extra:amd64 depends on libgdk-pixbuf2.0-0 (>= 2.22.0); however:
  Package libgdk-pixbuf2.0-0:amd64 is not configured yet.
 libmagickcore5-extra:amd64 depends on libmagickcore5 (>= 8:6.7.7.10); however:
  Package libmagickcore5:amd64 is not configured yet.
 libmagickcore5-extra:amd64 depends on libmagickwand5 (>= 8:6.7.7.10); however:
  Package libmagickwand5:amd64 is not configured yet.
 libmagickcore5-extra:amd64 depends on libpango1.0-0 (>= 1.22.0); however:
  Package libpango1.0-0:amd64 is not configured yet.
 libmagickcore5-extra:amd64 depends on librsvg2-2 (>= 2.14.4); however:
  Package librsvg2-2:amd64 is not configured yet.
 libmagickcore5-extra:amd64 depends on libwmf0.2-7 (>= 0.2.8.4); however:
  Package libwmf0.2-7:amd64 is not configured yet.
 libmagickcore5-extra:amd64 depends on libx11-6; h
dpkg: error processing libmagickcore5-extra:amd64 (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libgs9:
 libgs9 depends on libcups2 (>= 1.4.0); however:
  Package libcups2:amd64 is not configured yet.
 libgs9 depends on libcupsimage2 (>= 1.4.0); however:
  Package libcupsimage2:amd64 is not configured yet.

dpkg: error processing libgs9 (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of ghostscript:
 ghostscript depends on libgs9 (= 9.05~dfsg-6.3+deb7u1); however:
  Package libgs9 is not configured yet.

dpkg: error processing ghostscript (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of imagemagick:
 imagemagick depends on libmagickcore5 (>= 8:6.7.7.10); however:
  Package libmagickcore5:amd64 is not configured yet.
 imagemagick depends on libmagickwand5 (>= 8:6.7.7.10); however:
  Package libmagickwand5:amd64 is not configured yet.
 imagemagick depends on libx11-6; however:
  Package libx11-6:amd64 is not configured yet.
 imagemagick depends on libxext6; however:
  Package libxext6:amd64 is not configured yet.
 imagemagick depends on libxt6; however:
  Package libxt6:amd64 is not configured yet.

dpkg: error processing imagemagick (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
Errors were encountered while processing:
 libxcb1:amd64
 libx11-6:amd64
 libxcb-render0:amd64
 libxcb-shm0:amd64
 libxrender1:amd64
 libcairo2:amd64
 libcups2:amd64
 libcupsimage2:amd64
 libxft2:amd64
 libpango1.0-0:amd64
 libgdk-pixbuf2.0-0:amd64
 librsvg2-2:amd64
 librsvg2-common:amd64
 libxext6:amd64
 libxt6:amd64
 libmagickcore5:amd64
 libmagickwand5:amd64
 libwmf0.2-7:amd64
 libmagickcore5-extra:amd64
 libgs9
 ghostscript
 imagemagick
E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)

[editline]14th November 2013[/editline]

Fuck debian servers I'm going to run Fedora on them again.

[Anderen2]

[QUOTE=Mega1mpact;42865254]Have I expressed my [highlight]HATE[/highlight] for aptitude yet? I JUST want to install something. Why does it have to be like this?
Why

[editline]14th November 2013[/editline]

Fuck debian servers I'm going to run Fedora on them again.[/QUOTE]

Apt works perfectly without an hitch for me, even when installing the same package as you. Since you are getting so many missing dependencies it seems like you have some broken dependencies. Have you tried to force it with the -f flag? Or just fix all broken dependencies by doing "sudo apt-get -f install" with no package and then "sudo dpkg --configure -a" ?

[lavacano]

[QUOTE=MasterFen006;42842172]What would a systemd edition have to it's benefit over a sysvinit one?[/QUOTE]

systemd attempts to handle more than init system concerns. It also contains a system logger, a form of network manager (including wireless), a built-in variant of udev, and probably a few other things I haven't noticed. Here's why I don't like it.

• It's trying to do too much shit at once. One really bad sneeze in a certain component could conceivably bring the entire thing crashing down. [b]Not[/b] a risk I want to take with my init system.
• If you don't like a certain part of it, you can't drop in a replacement. For instance - the wireless network manager [b]absolutely fucking sucks.[/b] You have to prefix WEP keys with \", you can't tell it to auto connect to a specific network (so people who only connect to one or two networks every day are screwed over), and you absolutely have to make a profile for every network you connect it to (which leaves out the guy who has to do all his work in various coffee shops). It's convenient for literally nobody. Why haven't I switched it out for wpa_supplicant? Because I can't. There is no way to disable the network manager component.
• Maybe this is because I'm coming from OpenRC, but every thing I've heard about the init system being an improvement has been, in my experience, a load of waffle. There's nothing "better" that I can find about the way the init system works, just "different".

[shodan]

[QUOTE=Anderen2;42865867]Apt works perfectly without an hitch for me, even when installing the same package as you. Since you are getting so many missing dependencies it seems like you have some broken dependencies. Have you tried to force it with the -f flag? Or just fix all broken dependencies by doing "sudo apt-get -f install" with no package and then "sudo dpkg --configure -a" ?[/QUOTE]

apt-get with the -f flag and manually calling dpkg didn't work.

[hypershadsy]

I've recently installed Mint on a laptop, making it my first [I]primary[/I] Linux OS.

It's connected to the apartment wireless. My desktop is connected to apartment wired. I like to use the laptop as a fileserver, but the apartment wireless and apartment wired don't talk, so I have them both also connected to a modem-less router.

Now, Mint likes to use eth0 as a primary interface, and it just gives up if connections don't go through rather than trying other interfaces like wlan0. Since that router on eth0 isn't able to connect to the Internet, the Mint laptop completely ignores the perfectly-fine wlan0, and the whole system is Internet-incapable while the ethernet is plugged.

How do I get Mint to detect if eth0's gateway matches the ma:ca:dd:re:ss of headless the router (since I'd like eth0 to work normally when plugged into a legitimate router) and therefore only use it for talking to IPs in 192.168.2.0/24?

[editline]15th November 2013[/editline]

I have a feeling it has something to do with /etc/network/interfaces but I can't find any clues on what to do with it.

[editline]15th November 2013[/editline]

Turns out NetworkManager has an option under 'Routes' called 'use this connection only for resources on its network'. This will probably break eth0 while on any other network, though.
[URL]http://ubuntuforums.org/archive/index.php/t-1499325.html[/URL]

[Quarternions]

[QUOTE=nikomo;42853252]If you're allowing other people to upload custom code, and run it under the privileges of another user with more access than their own user has, you've already fucked up your security so badly, no amount of fucking with the config files will help you.[/QUOTE]

Again I am quite new to the whole linux os. This is just a experiment to see get a better grip on linux. So sorry if this all sounds like a really bad fuck up but I am really trying hard in trying to read as much as I can before posting here.

This is what I have got so far :

I setup apache with the package manager.
I created two virtual host config files, one for non ssl traffic and one for ssl traffic.
I setup FTP with this guide : "http://www.howtoforge.com/virtual-hosting-with-vsftpd-and-mysql-on-ubuntu-12.10" Which allows me to create ftp users using mysql and it creates virtual users under a non privileged account
I then setup two ftp accounts one for myself and one for a test website from a friend. I also created the two  directories in /home/vsftpd/
I added two virtual hosts in my non ssl config pointing to the directories created ftp directories.

Now this works but I have no idea on how to manage permissions per user, is this possible or do I need a completely different setup ?

[Comfy]

[QUOTE=quincy18;42869763]Again I am quite new to the whole linux os. This is just a experiment to see get a better grip on linux. So sorry if this all sounds like a really bad fuck up but I am really trying hard in trying to read as much as I can before posting here.

This is what I have got so far :

I setup apache with the package manager.
I created two virtual host config files, one for non ssl traffic and one for ssl traffic.
I setup FTP with this guide : "http://www.howtoforge.com/virtual-hosting-with-vsftpd-and-mysql-on-ubuntu-12.10" Which allows me to create ftp users using mysql and it creates virtual users under a non privileged account
I then setup two ftp accounts one for myself and one for a test website from a friend. I also created the two  directories in /home/vsftpd/
I added two virtual hosts in my non ssl config pointing to the directories created ftp directories.

Now this works but I have no idea on how to manage permissions per user, is this possible or do I need a completely different setup ?[/QUOTE]

I'd solve the shell_exec problem like this:

* Add a new user (No sudo rights!)
* Install NodeJS
* Create a NodeJS script, that listens on port X, and only accepts requests form localhost.

This nodeJS script listens for request from the local Apache webserver, and on request, it can execute a command with the privileges of the local user. This way, you have the execution on a separate user, and you can deny requests from any other destination other than localhost.

So the commands that are executed ate pretty isolated.

No modifications need to be done on the php.ini site.

[Quarternions]

[QUOTE=kaukassus;42869952]I'd solve the shell_exec problem like this:

* Add a new user (No sudo rights!)
* Install NodeJS
* Create a NodeJS script, that listens on port X, and only accepts requests form localhost.

This nodeJS script listens for request from the local Apache webserver, and on request, it can execute a command with the privileges of the local user. This way, you have the execution on a separate user, and you can deny requests from any other destination other than localhost.

So the commands that are executed ate pretty isolated.

No modifications need to be done on the php.ini site.[/QUOTE]

Thanks but that sounds a bit like over complicating it, I just found this article : [url]http://discussion.accuwebhost.com/linux-server/1096-how-enable-shell_exec-function-one-account.html[/url]

Which explains how to set it up using suhosin. Maybe it works the same as in your explanation but this seems a bit simpler for me, thanks anyway :)

[Comfy]

[QUOTE=quincy18;42870217]Thanks but that sounds a bit like over complicating it, I just found this article : [url]http://discussion.accuwebhost.com/linux-server/1096-how-enable-shell_exec-function-one-account.html[/url]

Which explains how to set it up using suhosin. Maybe it works the same as in your explanation but this seems a bit simpler for me, thanks anyway :)[/QUOTE]

I'm a person who tries to encapsule security threats, and separate them from the other services.
By having a small nodejs service (or similiar) as a different user, you disconnect the threat that shell_exec is from your main web application. You also need to block inbound connections to the port, so nobody can connect to this internal webapplication, and talk to it directly.

I'm just really careful when it comes to PHP's shell_exec (and other exec commands).
Also, for the love of god, please don't directly pipe things from $_GET or $_POST to shell_exec (yes, even if it's just parts). You can use the same principles of an SQLinjection on it.

Just make sure, that the file, containing the exec functions, cannot be called directly by the user, and if you need to pipe inputs from GET or POST, then please add make sure, you implement proper safety measures.
Also, take a look at this:
[url]http://php.net/manual/en/function.escapeshellarg.php[/url]
And:
[url]http://php.net/manual/en/function.escapeshellarg.php[/url]

[mastersrp]

[QUOTE=lavacano;42868354]systemd attempts to handle more than init system concerns. It also contains a system logger, a form of network manager (including wireless), a built-in variant of udev, and probably a few other things I haven't noticed. Here's why I don't like it.

• It's trying to do too much shit at once. One really bad sneeze in a certain component could conceivably bring the entire thing crashing down. [b]Not[/b] a risk I want to take with my init system.
• If you don't like a certain part of it, you can't drop in a replacement. For instance - the wireless network manager [b]absolutely fucking sucks.[/b] You have to prefix WEP keys with \", you can't tell it to auto connect to a specific network (so people who only connect to one or two networks every day are screwed over), and you absolutely have to make a profile for every network you connect it to (which leaves out the guy who has to do all his work in various coffee shops). It's convenient for literally nobody. Why haven't I switched it out for wpa_supplicant? Because I can't. There is no way to disable the network manager component.
• Maybe this is because I'm coming from OpenRC, but every thing I've heard about the init system being an improvement has been, in my experience, a load of waffle. There's nothing "better" that I can find about the way the init system works, just "different".[/QUOTE]

In regards to this, I can't wait to see OpenRC get a fully functional parallel support and eudev as the standard in Gentoo, if it isn't already.