General Linux Chat and Small Questions v. I broke my Arch Install - Hardware & Software

Type make

Don't you need to do ./configure first?

Depends on stuff. ./configure && make && sudo make install That should cover it.

[QUOTE=nikomo;45155508]Depends on stuff. ./configure && make && sudo make install That should cover it.[/QUOTE] Not if there's no configure script. If there's no configure script AND there is a makefile, run make. If there's no configure script AND NO makefile, run autoreconfigure && ./configure && make. To install, run make install (this usually installs to either /usr or /usr/local. Changing this is probably preferable on a lot of systems, but works fine on all systems).

I just copied my uni folder from my NTFS mounted partition to my EXT4 ~/Documents. Shit just [I]feels[/I] faster. [I]find[/I] is faster, git is faster, sublime is faster. That might just be placebo effect though.

You know, there's a reason we invented package managers.

Because it's the one true way?

[QUOTE=kaukassus;45157177]Because it's the one true way?[/QUOTE] It may not always be, but it's a well-suited tool for the job that it is supposed to do.

[QUOTE=diwako;45155074]I am kinda embarrassed, but how do I install slop? It comes with a makefile but this is actually my first time installing something like this or more like compiling it my self to use.[/QUOTE] In this particular case, you can just do [code]make; make install[/code]

[QUOTE=Naelstrom;45157749]In this particular case, you can just do [code]make; make install[/code][/QUOTE] If make fails, you don't want to try to install. This is smarter: [code]make && make install[/code] If make fails in that, make install won't execute. I suppose [code]./configure; make && make install[/code] Would be fairly flexible - it'll go ahead even if configuration isn't needed.

[QUOTE=nikomo;45159478]If make fails, you don't want to try to install. This is smarter: [code]make && make install[/code] If make fails in that, make install won't execute. I suppose [code]./configure; make && make install[/code] Would be fairly flexible - it'll go ahead even if configuration isn't needed.[/QUOTE] It'll also go ahead if configure fails and leaves a broken Makefile which may or may not remove your root partition (buildroot fuck you).

Well don't compile as root.

[QUOTE=FPtje;45156752]I just copied my uni folder from my NTFS mounted partition to my EXT4 ~/Documents. Shit just [I]feels[/I] faster. [I]find[/I] is faster, git is faster, sublime is faster. That might just be placebo effect though.[/QUOTE] Well the latest version of NTFS was released in 2001, whereas ext4 matured in 2008. You might want to see how it compares to ReFS (Win 8) once that matures though.

JUST USE A FUCKING PACKAGE MANAGER AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

I don't use a package manager when I'm installing a non-rpm package. Sue me

Facebook up, hit the lawyer, delete the gym.

[QUOTE=nikomo;45164070]JUST USE A FUCKING PACKAGE MANAGER AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA[/QUOTE] ./configure --prefix=~/.local I prefer that to /usr/local and using root for non-pacman installs.

Had my mom boot up a BSD based server running of a USB stick this morning. I feel like I have officially achieved family IT guy status today... terrible feeling. In hindsight, maybe I should have built her a windows server instead...

[QUOTE=nikomo;45164070]JUST USE A FUCKING PACKAGE MANAGER AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA[/QUOTE] but you can't apply your own Firefox branding in a package manager not even portage, it's not something you can just make a patch for

Sure you can, but you need to make the package too.

[QUOTE=reevezy67;45167748]Sure you can, but you need to make the package too.[/QUOTE] that doesn't count

Had [url=https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/4cc3bb9717b5d2273c4811187b2285c24a81d608338b78eaf88b7ba67abff4ef/analysis/]this[/url] happen to me. Whiping the drive it was on for now. Any ideas on what would secure my system for the next time this might happen?

[QUOTE=mastersrp;45173348]Had [url=https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/4cc3bb9717b5d2273c4811187b2285c24a81d608338b78eaf88b7ba67abff4ef/analysis/]this[/url] happen to me. Whiping the drive it was on for now. Any ideas on what would secure my system for the next time this might happen?[/QUOTE] I'd say it's a false alarm. I can't find any information about the virus online.

[QUOTE=Jookia;45173370]I'd say it's a false alarm. I can't find any information about the virus online.[/QUOTE] It's not false alarm, I know for a fact that it's a rootkit of some sort because I am not allowed to remove any of the files, regardless of user status (root even) or mounted from the same system, or mounted from a different system. The binary is a file that is downloaded from scripts that crontab is running every hour, and according to the link I posted it is part of the Elknot DDoS botnet ( [url]http://osdir.com/ml/clamav-users/2014-05/msg00219.html[/url] mentions this as well ). If you think the above is not enough evidence, feel free to investigate the rootkit files yourself: [url]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/5579836/rootkit.tar[/url]

[QUOTE=mastersrp;45173348]Had [url=https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/4cc3bb9717b5d2273c4811187b2285c24a81d608338b78eaf88b7ba67abff4ef/analysis/]this[/url] happen to me. Whiping the drive it was on for now. Any ideas on what would secure my system for the next time this might happen?[/QUOTE] You could try installing a detection/integrity check tool like Tiger, chkrootkit, and Aide; those are just some of what is available.

[QUOTE=mastersrp;45173654]It's not false alarm, I know for a fact that it's a rootkit of some sort because I am not allowed to remove any of the files, regardless of user status (root even) or mounted from the same system, or mounted from a different system. The binary is a file that is downloaded from scripts that crontab is running every hour, and according to the link I posted it is part of the Elknot DDoS botnet ( [url]http://osdir.com/ml/clamav-users/2014-05/msg00219.html[/url] mentions this as well ). If you think the above is not enough evidence, feel free to investigate the rootkit files yourself: [url]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/5579836/rootkit.tar[/url][/QUOTE] is it a linux rootkit? if so WOW those are fucking rare!

[QUOTE=Mega1mpact;45173856]is it a linux rootkit? if so WOW those are fucking rare![/QUOTE] Exactly what I thought, but lo and behold, the data is there. [editline]21st June 2014[/editline] A couple of searched led me to believe this rootkit might gain access from weak SSH points and if that was the case then I know why it got in. Time to stop using default passwords on my portable Linux installations :v:

My arch server isn't secure whatsoever, it's basically free access to whoever gets in. But the worst they could do is delete some movies and my Rust-lang stuff which isn't worth keeping anyway.

Or use it as a proxy to distribute child pornography, getting you into legal problems.

[QUOTE=nikomo;45174366]Or use it as a proxy to distribute child pornography, getting you into legal problems.[/QUOTE] Don't do it nikomo