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

[QUOTE=PredGD;48540680]any idea how to make xfce's window list in the panel respect the icon theme? currently it doesn't use the theme I've chosen and instead goes to the default icons [IMG]http://pred.me/pics/1440538860.png[/IMG] everything but my open windows respect the icon theme, any idea how to fix this?[/QUOTE] I'm afraid you might have to right click them, go to properties, and change the icon manually, if they do not automatically change.

Gah, the vt-d thread on the arch forum was closed because people kept asking for bans. At least they left it in place, but it still sucks :(

[QUOTE=ben1066;48544302]Gah, the vt-d thread on the arch forum was closed because people kept asking for bans. At least they left it in place, but it still sucks :([/QUOTE] Asking for bans in what way? The "I think that user is a faggot, BAN HIM!!" way or "how do I 'acquire' windows without paying" way?

[QUOTE=jasonwryan][QUOTE=Bronek][QUOTE=jasonwryan]Anyone else looking for a ban?[/QUOTE] Yes, me too please. I do use Arch as my favourite distro, but I also happen to use other distros as well, and I am not going to abide by the order to discriminate their users. You are welcome to interpret this as a declaration of disobedience and ban me to pre-empt any post of mine which might (or might not) benefit users of other distros. Have it your way, if that is what you want.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=jasonwryan]The next person that posts a whine in here about our policy can thank themselves for having the thread closed. You want to share knowledge about KVM passthrough, then stick to that.[/QUOTE] And... we have a winner! Closing. [/QUOTE] The "I don't use Arch Linux but these people are still helpful" sort of way, I guess.

[QUOTE=ben1066;48544727]The "I don't use Arch Linux but these people are still helpful" sort of way, I guess.[/QUOTE] Really cements the fact that Arch powerusers are elitist assholes, and their forum policy helps that foster.

[quote]After extensive discussion, the moderation team have decided to leave this thread in a publicly accessible area of the forums for the sake of posterity (no pun intended) as an archival reference of information. It will however remain locked. The philosophy of the Arch Linux forums is that they are to be the canonical reference for users of Arch Linux. This is the primary reason we try to limit discussion to pure Arch Linux, we don't really want to provide ambiguity by saying do it this way for Arch, that way for Manjaro, and another for Fedora. It is important to note that we as the moderation team do not really have any animosity towards other distributions; they exist for reasons that are perfectly valid. We don't care what distribution someone chooses to use, and we don't mind people using other distributions using or participating on the forums. It is primarily when requests for help with other distributions pop up that we are compelled to shut them down. We had a long debate at one point about permitting the support of Arch Arm as many of us use it. In the end, we decided to not create an exception.[/quote] What a fucking elitist asshole, am I right?

Any distro that thinks it's OK to just delete /lib is garbage anyway

I just started grad school and thanks to Arch I found a (minor) security vulnerability on the school's network on the first day. Arch wouldn't let me SSH into the computer science lab unless I added ssh-dss as a key algorithm, which was weird because I was using an RSA key and the servers also have RSA keys. Except it turns out they don't [code]iapetus:~% cut -d' ' -f1 /etc/ssh/ssh_host_rsa_key.pub ssh-dss[/code] So whichever genius set up these computers a decade ago decided that the best way to generate RSA keys was to copy the DSA keys and change the name. Nice. I was the first person to notice the problem because OpenSSH deprecated ssh-dss two weeks ago and Arch already got the update.

[QUOTE=Larikang;48546747]What a fucking elitist asshole, am I right?[/QUOTE] I understand that, but I don't see how closing the thread helps anyone, it stops those using Arch (maybe more, it's the Arch forum, where other places may have some Fedora, Ubuntu etc information) as much as those not using it.

[QUOTE=ben1066;48548938]I understand that, but I don't see how closing the thread helps anyone, it stops those using Arch (maybe more, it's the Arch forum, where other places may have some Fedora, Ubuntu etc information) as much as those not using it.[/QUOTE] I agree, but I think the problem is that it just so happened that that thread had becoming the de facto reference for many non-Arch users, which goes against their forum policies. It was going to keep causing problems for the moderators so long as other distros' users kept referring people to that thread to ask for help. Locking the thread seems like a good solution since those links will still work if people want to read about it, while making it clear that the Arch forums are [i]not[/i] the place to go if you can't get VT-d working with Ubuntu. They apply the same exact policy to the wiki and I don't think anyone would call them "elitist assholes" if they got upset for people adding Fedora and Ubuntu instructions to the KVM article on an Arch-specific wiki. There are plenty of distro-agnostic forums where the discussion can continue. It's really not that big of a deal.

If your rules get in the way of a good thread then your rules suck.

[QUOTE=lavacano;48547351]Any distro that thinks it's OK to just delete /lib is garbage anyway[/QUOTE] Void Linux did away with /bin, /sbin, /usr/sbin. How? Symlinks. I suppose there's a lesson to be learned here, but it doesn't really make much of a difference. It just makes less sense to spread things out around the system, when the difference in these is marginal at best.

[QUOTE=mastersrp;48550695]Void Linux did away with /bin, /sbin, /usr/sbin. How? Symlinks. I suppose there's a lesson to be learned here, but it doesn't really make much of a difference. It just makes less sense to spread things out around the system, when the difference in these is marginal at best.[/QUOTE] When they migrated, did they actually do the right thing and move the contents into /usr/bin? Or did they just "rm -r /bin" and call it a day? The first is reasonable, the second is Arch.

[QUOTE=lavacano;48550913]When they migrated, did they actually do the right thing and move the contents into /usr/bin? Or did they just "rm -r /bin" and call it a day? The first is reasonable, the second is Arch.[/QUOTE] It's been a long while ago, but iirc, they moved everything away, then created the symlinks, then moved everything to the /usr/bin directory. Additionally, everything now installed with prefixes to the /usr/bin directory (when possible). [editline]27th August 2015[/editline] It doesn't make much sense to have /usr/sbin, /sbin, and /bin anyway. /usr/bin is fine, and while a lot of people have commented on it being problematic in regard to emergency shells, I have yet to see a system where /usr was on a seperate partition. /usr/local, /var, and /opt, sure. But /usr/ doesn't make sense, considering /usr/lib.

[QUOTE=Levelog;48514035]Any suggestions on how to improve my knowledge with Linux? I was working with my boss today on a few Linux boxes running a mail server, RADIUS, and mysql and I just got so lost. He's so damn fast.[/QUOTE] I learned from "The Unix Programming Environment" by Rob Pike

[QUOTE=DrTaxi;48549730]If your rules get in the way of a good thread then your rules suck.[/QUOTE] I feel like a idiot for having problems formulating a response that's technically identical to yours.

For the past week I've been compiling the Linux kernel from source once a day at work. I'm now compiling X server from source. I have no idea what I'm doing. [editline]27th August 2015[/editline] Why does this driver require some of the newest kernel I don't know.

imgur is blocked at work, but google works! [url]https://goo.gl/photos/LKfzJJZ9Vmqi83hQ7[/url] I managed to break my desktop by updating the kernel and xserver, both compiled from source... :(

Does elementary still locks the desktop when you first install?

[QUOTE=mastersrp;48552322]It's been a long while ago, but iirc, they moved everything away, then created the symlinks, then moved everything to the /usr/bin directory. Additionally, everything now installed with prefixes to the /usr/bin directory (when possible). [editline]27th August 2015[/editline] It doesn't make much sense to have /usr/sbin, /sbin, and /bin anyway. /usr/bin is fine, and while a lot of people have commented on it being problematic in regard to emergency shells, I have yet to see a system where /usr was on a seperate partition. /usr/local, /var, and /opt, sure. But /usr/ doesn't make sense, considering /usr/lib.[/QUOTE] I saw a server environment where /usr was on a separate partition and /home was a symlink to /usr/home course this was before systemd came along and decided to stick its shit in /usr despite being a critical system process, so

About to install Lubuntu on my ancient Latitude D620, excited to see how it runs.

But #!++ for shit computers!

[t]http://i.imgur.com/iEZ5lZV.jpg[/t] Actually ended up going with Xubuntu. The install is going nicely. Excited to start using this thing again. holy shit that is a quality photograph 10/10 on my part [editline]30th August 2015[/editline] Alright, actually posting from it now. Runs like a dream, much better I think than when it was running XP.

Snip wrong thread.

[QUOTE=lavacano;48576587]I saw a server environment where /usr was on a separate partition and /home was a symlink to /usr/home course this was before systemd came along and decided to stick its shit in /usr despite being a critical system process, so[/QUOTE] Wasn't that kind of what the BSD guys did though? Void Linux is nice in the latter area, in that it doesn't even support systemd. [editline]31st August 2015[/editline] (Void Linux is also made by some guys from the BSD culture, so something may be borrowed from that)

[QUOTE=mastersrp;48579465]Wasn't that kind of what the BSD guys did though?[/quote] I think the admin was a BSD vet. [quote]Void Linux is nice in the latter area, in that it doesn't even support systemd. [editline]31st August 2015[/editline] (Void Linux is also made by some guys from the BSD culture, so something may be borrowed from that)[/QUOTE] I still hold the opinion that system critical files don't belong in /usr, period. If I ever decided to do the whole "combine the bin dirs" thing I'd probably just link everything to /bin (or take a shortcut and link /usr to /) just to make sure the system critical files are where they belong.

[QUOTE=lavacano;48579931]I think the admin was a BSD vet. I still hold the opinion that system critical files don't belong in /usr, period. If I ever decided to do the whole "combine the bin dirs" thing I'd probably just link everything to /bin (or take a shortcut and link /usr to /) just to make sure the system critical files are where they belong.[/QUOTE] What resides outside the /usr directory, that would allow you to have everything outside it? Or to put it in other words, what critical software would only work from /usr? I mean, a lot of stuff requires /usr/share/* shit to work, and they don't try reading /share.

[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;48581646]also otterbrowser is safari?[/QUOTE] [quote]Browser based on Webkit[/quote]

konqueror shows up as safari too sometimes

[QUOTE=mastersrp;48581135]What resides outside the /usr directory, that would allow you to have everything outside it? Or to put it in other words, what critical software would only work from /usr? I mean, a lot of stuff requires /usr/share/* shit to work, and they don't try reading /share.[/QUOTE] The shit that's required to boot. A shell, init (again, systemd ruined this one), kernel modules...you know, shit that would cause the kernel to panic if it can't find it.