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

Generic comment singing the praises of pacman. It's the only package manager I really know :v:

But in all seriousness now. Do any of you guys know the answer to this? [QUOTE=Mega1mpact;41862539]So I just reinstalled Fedora because I was too lazy clean up and now this is happening: [t]http://i.imgur.com/ferDGph.jpg[/t] It shows that message and then 5 seconds later it just locks up everything except the audio/mouse. Do any of you what's going on?[/QUOTE]

Real men install packages with 'make install' [editline]16th August 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Mega1mpact;41864619]But in all seriousness now. Do any of you guys know the answer to this?[/QUOTE] Check dmesg and other logs to see what happened around that time.

[QUOTE=IpHa;41864736]Real men install packages with 'make install' [editline]16th August 2013[/editline] Check dmesg and other logs to see what happened around that time.[/QUOTE] Real men spend hours compiling source code which they have not/do not plan to patch and which they would waste more time compiling than they could ever hope to recoup in the marginal performance gains offered by customizing compilation flags? Not directed at you, just in the general direction of people who dislike binary packages. In many cases, like OpenMW for example, where development is ongoing and you may want to poke around in the source anyway I see no problem, or in cases where you want to apply a custom patch or use some non-standard version of software I see compiling perfectly well, but in the case of your entire system I'm not so sure its worth it.

i sit on my ass customizing compilation flags all day, anyone that doesn't is just a lesser being. compiling from source is the only -true- method. anyone else is just lazy!

So skype has been crashing on me, then failing to re-start, which really sucks. I try a sudo killall skype and it proceeds as if it correctly did so, but it makes no difference. Then I realized that the skype process seems to be re-creating itself immediately: if I perform "sudo killall skype" again and again, every time it indicates a task was closed. Any ideas what I could do?

try killall -9 skype

You can also try doing it from within htop. Highlight the offending process and hit "k" to pull up the kill menu. The default is SIGTERM which asks the process nicely to stop, but you can type any number (like FlashStock suggested 9 for SIGKILL) to try to get rid of it. Even that may not work though, see [URL="http://major.io/2010/03/18/sigterm-vs-sigkill/"]here[/URL]: [quote] Although SIGKILL is defined in the same signal header file as SIGTERM, it cannot be ignored by the process. In fact, the process isn’t even made aware of the SIGKILL signal since the signal goes straight to the kernel init. At that point, init will stop the process. The process never gets the opportunity to catch the signal and act on it. However, the kernel may not be able to successfully kill the process in some situations. If the process is waiting for network or disk I/O, the kernel won’t be able to stop it. [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zombie_process"]Zombie processes[/URL] and processes caught in an [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uninterruptible_sleep"]uninterruptible sleep[/URL] cannot be stopped by the kernel, either. A reboot is required to clear those processes from the system. [/quote]

Happy 20th Birthday Debian! [url]http://bits.debian.org/2013/08/20-birthday-debian.html[/url]

[QUOTE=FlubberNugget;41864029]i dunno about you, but apt is just as human readable as that sans all of the fancy formatting, which i don't particularly care for. if you do, i guess it's just up to preference if i really want human readable output, i'd use synaptic with console output[/QUOTE] I like Portage's method. Doesn't use a whole lot of fancy characters, it goes colorful instead [img]http://jesusfuck.me/di/T089/portagecolors.png[/img] if you don't like the colors you can either change them (I forget what file, but it's in /etc/portage somewhere), or use --color n in EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS

[QUOTE=Doritos_Man;41867766]Happy 20th Birthday Debian! [url]http://bits.debian.org/2013/08/20-birthday-debian.html[/url][/QUOTE] When will it be 20 years since Deb left Ian?

[QUOTE=lavacano;41868475]I like Portage's method. Doesn't use a whole lot of fancy characters, it goes colorful instead [img]http://jesusfuck.me/di/T089/portagecolors.png[/img] if you don't like the colors you can either change them (I forget what file, but it's in /etc/portage somewhere), or use --color n in EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS[/QUOTE] i'm sure those colours are fine if you change your terminal emulator's colourscheme, but i'd hate to have to use that in a VT all the time [editline]17th August 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Doritos_Man;41867766]Happy 20th Birthday Debian! [url]http://bits.debian.org/2013/08/20-birthday-debian.html[/url][/QUOTE] [quote]Since I run Debian on my computers, I do not play anymore to 3D shooting games, not because of the lack of Free 3D drivers, but because developing Debian is more fun and addictive.[/quote] uh huh [editline]17th August 2013[/editline] on the topic of terminal emulators, what font do you guys use? i mostly use [url=https://github.com/neeee/tewi-font]tewi[/url], but sometimes i switch between that and terminus. for my vt, it's always terminus

[QUOTE=Doritos_Man;41867766]Happy 20th Birthday Debian! [url]http://bits.debian.org/2013/08/20-birthday-debian.html[/url][/QUOTE] I love having a birthday near Debian's. Mine is on the 19th. It's funny how Debian is my favorite distro.

[QUOTE=FlubberNugget;41869823]i'm sure those colours are fine if you change your terminal emulator's colourscheme, but i'd hate to have to use that in a VT all the time [editline]17th August 2013[/editline] uh huh [editline]17th August 2013[/editline] on the topic of terminal emulators, what font do you guys use? i mostly use [url=https://github.com/neeee/tewi-font]tewi[/url], but sometimes i switch between that and terminus. for my vt, it's always terminus[/QUOTE] I really like Terminus (9pt)

[QUOTE=FlubberNugget;41869823]i'm sure those colours are fine if you change your terminal emulator's colourscheme, but i'd hate to have to use that in a VT all the time[/QUOTE] Like I said, you can change the colors Portage uses. I have another box that uses a lot of blue. [editline]17th August 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=FlubberNugget;41869823]on the topic of terminal emulators, what font do you guys use? i mostly use [url=https://github.com/neeee/tewi-font]tewi[/url], but sometimes i switch between that and terminus. for my vt, it's always terminus[/QUOTE] DejaVu Sans Mono is just perfect in my opinion

[QUOTE=FlubberNugget;41869823]on the topic of terminal emulators, what font do you guys use? i mostly use [url=https://github.com/neeee/tewi-font]tewi[/url], but sometimes i switch between that and terminus. for my vt, it's always terminus[/QUOTE] I'm almost certain I use Inconsolata-g but I might look into changing that at some point.

It's a recurring problem, this booger. [b][drm:i915_hangcheck_hung][/b] and [b][drm:i915_hangcheck_elapsed][/b] whenever I run something both done in Java and in fullscreen. System locks up, barely able to access the TTY when it doesn't completely lock up, and finally requires a hard reboot. It seemed to have been a kernel problem when looking for solutions, but regardless on 3.8 or 3.11, the problem persists. Any possible idea on fixing this?

Question, what is the most secure Linux distro.

Out of the box, I think Fedora could be considered up there. However, if you really want secure, you can probably make any distro secure. [url]https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Security[/url]

Last I used Fedora, it came with SELinux turned on out of the box. As far as I know, none of the other distros are doing that (though most do provide the option)

You guys know if there is a way to install Ubuntu over a pen drive, but not as a LiveCD, as an entire system. So when you shut it down all your progress doesn't wipe and stuff, and that information is all stored on said pen drive?

I just had the most informative hour or so of playing around with the Arch installer, only to meet one undeniable fact: Fuck UEFI. Go to hell. Time to use BIOS-mode, UEFI is not ready for me. [editline]21st August 2013[/editline] Now I installed it with traditional BIOS, and it refuses to even enter GRUB, what the fuck I've never seen a distro installation fail this abysmally even when following the instructions to the damn letter.

[QUOTE=OttR;41913077]You guys know if there is a way to install Ubuntu over a pen drive, but not as a LiveCD, as an entire system. So when you shut it down all your progress doesn't wipe and stuff, and that information is all stored on said pen drive?[/QUOTE] Read [URL="https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LiveUsbPendrivePersistent"]Ubuntu Wiki: Persistent LiveUSB[/URL]. Many different ways to do it described there

[QUOTE=Anderen2;41913644]Read [URL="https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LiveUsbPendrivePersistent"]Ubuntu Wiki: Persistent LiveUSB[/URL]. Many different ways to do it described there[/QUOTE] Right, thanks. Will try when I'm not in school because of this bullshit emulated Windows :v:

So the weirdest thing is happening right now None of my GTK apps will accept any icon themes other than the GNOME default icons. I don't know what else to say, but its annoying as shit. It happens in every DE/WM I've tried it under.

Huh. I just had my first unexplainable case of Arch fucking up on me (or me fucking up on me?). I upgraded my kernel yesterday and today I was greeted with a systemd recovery screen. Uh, alright. journalctl -xn showed that /boot/efi failed to mount. After Googling around, people temporarily fixed it by downgrading their kernel to the last version. This worked, and after checking pacman.log, apparently /boot wasn't mounted when I was running mkinitcpio yesterday (????). I have no idea why or how, but after manually mounting /boot and /boot/efi and regenerating initramfses, everything was fine. My fstab was fine too but I just changed it to use /dev names instead of UUIDs. I don't even know.

I've nearly had it with GTK's shit. I'm considering going full QT.

Keep failing to install Ubuntu using Unetbootin. [img]http://i.imgur.com/WVSPVFe.png[/img] Hangs here and at another part, I think it also hangs at the persistence part. I give it 4096MB because appareantly 4GB was the size limit, but it still won't work. Anybody knows what it could be?

[QUOTE=Lyoko774;41914693]I've nearly had it with GTK's shit. I'm considering going full QT.[/QUOTE] I don't know why people stick with GNOME, their apps are pretty bad to use compared to the Qt versions. (that file dialog...)

[QUOTE=danharibo;41917004]I don't know why people stick with GNOME, their apps are pretty bad to use compared to the Qt versions. (that file dialog...)[/QUOTE] I just don't mind. I definitely prefer to develop in Qt though.