General Linux Chat and Small Questions v. Year of the Linux Desktop! - Hardware & Software

When you accidentally 'cp -rv .. ../somedirectory" ..where did all of my storage space go

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;50963291]Hey, I'm going to be looking at a family member's computer. I may have to do updates and fixes on it. If she's still on XP I'm forcing her to use something more up to date. What Linux distro would you recommend for a total beginner who knows absolutely nothing about computers? I've been thinking Linux Lite. [url]https://www.linuxliteos.com/[/url][/QUOTE] Xubuntu if she has 2GB of RAM or more, Lubuntu if not. Make sure you use the computer for a day or two (web browsing, office stuff, the usual) and iron out any bugs she might encounter in every day usage. Ideally you'd want to get the system running smoothly enough that she never has to look at the terminal (and/or you never get a call to have to fix something :v:). Also if she has low RAM (under 4GB I'd say), enable zRAM.

[QUOTE=Dr. Evilcop;50964277]Xubuntu if she has 2GB of RAM or more, Lubuntu if not. Make sure you use the computer for a day or two (web browsing, office stuff, the usual) and iron out any bugs she might encounter in every day usage. Ideally you'd want to get the system running smoothly enough that she never has to look at the terminal (and/or you never get a call to have to fix something :v:). Also if she has low RAM (under 4GB I'd say), enable zRAM.[/QUOTE] I'm actually gonna be there for a week during which time I will help her out. I was just informed that the computer is over 10 years old at this point. I might make her shop for a new one, I'll help her out. [editline]28th August 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Dr. Evilcop;50964277]Xubuntu if she has 2GB of RAM or more, Lubuntu if not. Make sure you use the computer for a day or two (web browsing, office stuff, the usual) and iron out any bugs she might encounter in every day usage. Ideally you'd want to get the system running smoothly enough that she never has to look at the terminal (and/or you never get a call to have to fix something :v:). Also if she has low RAM (under 4GB I'd say), enable zRAM.[/QUOTE] I'll give Lubuntu a shot if I absolutely have to, but Linux Lite's own recommended requirement is 1GB. I have no reason to doubt that. I'll play around with it to make sure it's satisfactory, if not I'll fall back on Lubuntu.

The main reasons I'm recommending Lubuntu/Xubuntu over Linux Lite are first that I've used both Lubuntu and Xubuntu and know that Xubuntu is good and Lubuntu is decent, and second that Lubuntu/Xubuntu are official Ubuntu flavors, as opposed to Linux Lite. I've never used Linux Lite, but unless you find some super compelling reason to use it, I'd just go with Lubuntu/Xubuntu. Also a ten year old computer isn't necessarily a killer on Linux - Core 2 Duos/Core 2 Quads are still fairly usable. If you max out the RAM (which should be cheap since it's old) you'll probably be good to go.

My super compelling reason is that it's been very well-reviewed by several reputable places and I appreciate some of its features built for beginners in mind. It has very good locally installed documentation for when I can't be there to help her out (this is the extremely important bit), it's got some special tools built in for automating certain tasks without needing to interact with the terminal in the form of Lite Tweaks, and it has a special package installer called Lite Software installed alongside Synaptic for installing some more commonly-used programs built for a Windows user looking to specifically switch to Linux alternatives. It's also pretty well polished and its XFCE is already configured to look something like Windows out of the box. I could, of course, do all this stuff myself on a fresh Xubuntu install but I feel like these features being standard is enough for me to make it worth it for someone who isn't computer savvy like this family member. Less headache for me. These little things add up to me, enough to make me consider it over a more vanilla distribution. For what it's worth I poked around in it a bit (didn't install it over my Fedora install, but ran the live USB), and it seemed totally fine. Aside from those features it's essentially a reskinned Xubuntu, just with some extras added on top to make it compelling for someone looking for a beginner-oriented distro. My only real complaint is the terrible default wallpaper. [t]https://distrowatch.com/images/screenshots/lite-3.0-menu.png[/t] [editline]29th August 2016[/editline] My other only complaint is that because it's built off Ubuntu 16.04 LTS, its EOL is in only 2 years. Which means I might need to fly all the way back down to keep her updated. The only real ways I see around that are to teach her how to do that stuff herself, or get her something that has a rolling release model. Both present their own challenges and pitfalls, so I'll have to think about.

Which one is the best version of Linux

Android

DVL [url]https://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=dvl[/url]

That's actually a pretty good way to learn about security.

Justin Bieber Linux

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;50966236]My other only complaint is that because it's built off Ubuntu 16.04 LTS, its EOL is in only 2 years. Which means I might need to fly all the way back down to keep her updated. The only real ways I see around that are to teach her how to do that stuff herself, or get her something that has a rolling release model. Both present their own challenges and pitfalls, so I'll have to think about.[/QUOTE] Doesn't an LTS release get five years? [editline]29th August 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Dr. Evilcop;50966668]Justin Bieber Linux[/QUOTE] RebeccaBlackOS

[QUOTE=Dan41550;50966418]Which one is the best version of Linux[/QUOTE] With a sex god like this backing it, I have to say GNU/Linux. [IMG]https://i.imgur.com/7NqqQ9U.jpg[/IMG]

[url]https://rms.sexy[/url]

[QUOTE=Dan41550;50966418]Which one is the best version of Linux[/QUOTE] Alright, see, a question like that demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of Linux in the first place. With that in mind, [url=http://www.ubuntu.com/desktop]you probably want Ubuntu.[/url] (Just keep in mind that things will act up on nVidia cards until you install the drivers)

[QUOTE=Adam.GameDev;50966937]Doesn't an LTS release get five years? [editline]29th August 2016[/editline] RebeccaBlackOS[/QUOTE] Oh you're right, I just misunderstood. They release new LTS versions every 2 years but maintain support for 5.

[QUOTE=Wormy;50968448]I might as well ask here, if anyone has knowledge in streaming. Trying to stream some .mp4 files from my Ubuntu VPS webserver, and when I do so it causes a pretty high memory usage. Eventually all the memory gets used and the webserver stops responding as a result (this is with around 10 - 20 people watching at the same time). Is there a way to circumvent this issue? I read something about nginx, would that help with performance?[/QUOTE] Seems like you've read about Using Nginx as a reverse caching proxy for Apache (which I'm guessing is your current webserver). Although unless you're using some specific Apache features, or a "complex" website, then Switching to pure Nginx will be beneficial in the long runs since it's overall much more efficient than Apache. The downside is that there's not as much documentation in the shape of examples as with Apache, and that it's different in configuration.

[QUOTE=Sam Za Nemesis;50968569]Wow you want a punch on the crotch[/QUOTE] He's not lying tho, should've specified GNU/Linux if being as anal as you.

[QUOTE=Sam Za Nemesis;50968569]Wow you want a punch on the crotch[/QUOTE] [sp]Well it's definitely not MeeGo[/sp]

Guys, is there any reason to think that Antergos might be altering Arch core, or doing other unscrupulous things like backdoors and/or some kind of tracking? Is it possible and how likely would such scenario be? Would such practice get detected easily? Can such things be hidden well in Antergos?

[QUOTE=Van-man;50968575]He's not lying tho, should've specified GNU/Linux if being as anal as you.[/QUOTE] Android is kinda bad tho, if it weren't for the whole lack of freedom bit, iOS would be fantastic because as a whole it's much better designed. And all android has in common with the linux people talk about in this thread is a heavily modified kernel. [QUOTE=sachubifri;50968649]Guys, is there any reason to think that Antergos might be altering Arch core, or doing other unscrupulous things like backdoors and/or some kind of tracking? Is it possible and how likely would such scenario be? Would such practice get detected easily? Can such things be hidden well in Antergos?[/QUOTE] It's possible, but highly unlikely. And if it did happen it'd be discovered eventually and then a lynch mob would form and the distro would die.

[QUOTE=sachubifri;50968649]Guys, is there any reason to think that Antergos might be altering Arch core, or [I][B]doing other unscrupulous things like backdoors and/or some kind of tracking[/B][/I]? Is it possible and how likely would such scenario be? Would such practice get detected easily? Can such things be hidden well in Antergos?[/QUOTE] wow man just compile gentoo if you are really that paranoid Antergos is Arch based, has [B]pacman[/B] as package manager so what you really want to see is if the [B]/etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist[/B] points to Arch Linux mirrors. As long as it's the default, there's no need to worry lmao

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;50968750]Android is kinda bad tho tbh, I only use it because the alternative is iOS.[/QUOTE] My beef is Google's direction with pandering to idiots who could mistaken a clothes iron for a handset, and the incredibly shitty way of handling app permissions. Basically things iOS seems to be even worse at, so they're trying to mimic iOS's appeal while shafting the power users who pretty much laid a good chunk of the foundation for them actually having any popularity in the first place.

[QUOTE=ichiman94;50968769] Antergos is Arch based, has [B]pacman[/B] as package manager so what you really want to see is if the [B]/etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist[/B] points to Arch Linux mirrors. As long as it's the default, there's no need to worry lmao[/QUOTE] But that doesn't mean that initial automatic installer didn't do something behind your back.

[QUOTE=ichiman94;50968769]wow man just compile gentoo if you are really that paranoid Antergos is Arch based, has [B]pacman[/B] as package manager so what you really want to see is if the [B]/etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist[/B] points to Arch Linux mirrors. As long as it's the default, there's no need to worry lmao[/QUOTE] If you manage to pull your stage3 and/or Portage tree from a malicious mirror you could have the same problems with Gentoo. If you're really that paranoid the only solution is to build your own OS in the low level programming language(s) of your choice and airgap yourself from the entire rest of the world. Or, you could chill the hell out, and actually double check to make sure everything is where and how it's supposed to be.

[QUOTE=sachubifri;50968865]But that doesn't mean that initial automatic installer didn't do something behind your back.[/QUOTE] Do you also know whether pacstrap does anything naughty without checking whats on your iso either? No, not really. At least these backdoors can't be hidden as easily as those within proprietary programs, so if you're using something popular you can at least put faith in that.

[QUOTE=Van-man;50968567]Seems like you've read about Using Nginx as a reverse caching proxy for Apache (which I'm guessing is your current webserver). Although unless you're using some specific Apache features, or a "complex" website, then Switching to pure Nginx will be beneficial in the long runs since it's overall much more efficient than Apache. The downside is that there's not as much documentation in the shape of examples as with Apache, and that it's different in configuration.[/QUOTE] How is nginx more efficient than Apache2? I have been unable to really verify this. All I've gotten ever has been "nginx is better able to handle 10k req/s than apache most of the time", which is hardly a problem for most people anyway.

The debian server I keep in the closet (Intel C2D, 4GB ram) seems to be having issues with its ssh service. It doesn't work a good majority of the time. A remote raspberry pi that's set to record raw data and send to the server (using rsync) for processing works as intended and the server correctly uploads the final image to my website. But when I try to do so manually I can't access the debian server when I try SSHing into it, or from the remote pi or the pi that acts as my internet gateway. This isn't a key issue because my keys work, the server is just unresponsive unless I go haul out a monitor and restart the ssh service on the device itself. There's a root cronjob every 6 hours to restart the service but I haven't noticed any difference.

[QUOTE=mastersrp;50969030]How is nginx more efficient than Apache2? I have been unable to really verify this. All I've gotten ever has been "nginx is better able to handle 10k req/s than apache most of the time", which is hardly a problem for most people anyway.[/QUOTE] Better memory management, and also a little bit more lightweight on CPU. Both which are crucial for a barebone VPS or embedded computer, or a massive website accessed by thousands concurrently.

[QUOTE=lavacano;50968313]Alright, see, a question like that demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of Linux in the first place. With that in mind, [url=http://www.ubuntu.com/desktop]you probably want Ubuntu.[/url] (Just keep in mind that things will act up on nVidia cards until you install the drivers)[/QUOTE] Xubuntu > Ubuntu for beginners. Unity is hot garbage to many people, especially those who are just moving away from Windows for the first time. Xubuntu has nearly all the benefits of Ubuntu without the subjectively awful DE.

[QUOTE=Van-man;50969057]Better memory management, and also a little bit more lightweight on CPU. Both which are crucial for a barebone VPS or embedded computer, or a massive website accessed by thousands concurrently.[/QUOTE] Running a mail server, FTP server, Apache2 server, and a DNS server, in less than 50MB RAM, doesn't seem to be not lightweight. I don't think nginx can shave much off of that either. But do you have any sources on that? Because your claims are just as useful as the ones I just posted.