General Linux Chat and Small Questions v. Year of the Linux Desktop!
4,886 replies, posted
Good News. su is now fixed and merged into systemd.
[QUOTE]su is really a broken concept. It will given you kind of a shell, and it’s fine to use it for that, but it’s not a full login, and shouldn’t be mistaken for one.[/QUOTE]
Lennart Poettering
[URL="https://tlhp.cf/lennart-poettering-su/"]source[/URL]
it's not supposed to be a full login you goddamned numbskull
it's supposed to be enough to do whatever administrative task you need done and then you're supposed to exit. if we wanted a full login we'd actually log into the account
poettering what is even wrong with you
[QUOTE=TheCreeper;48582882]Good News. su is now fixed and merged into systemd.
Lennart Poettering
[URL="https://tlhp.cf/lennart-poettering-su/"]source[/URL][/QUOTE]
I really like some aspects of systemd, but what the fuck is this? I honestly can't see any improvement.
Today I learned that if you try to tell xmodmap you have two scroll wheels, X thinks you're full of shit and throws an error
The "systemd su" is yet another one of those things retards around the world look at, see that it can do one thing, and then claim it's specifically meant for that.
It's a part of machinectl, which is meant for container management. But because it uses systemd to do that, yes, you can login to the systemd session of your current computer, instead of a container on a dedicated server in a datacenter.
It's more like SSH'ing to localhost than su. SSH can do a hell of a lot more, than just connect to the local machine, too.
[QUOTE=lavacano;48582732]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.[/QUOTE]
But why would you want things like firefox to be available when you're booting? Hell, I'd even say that syslinux, linux, dracut, and busybox, should get you places you wouldn't dream of. And that should be enough for anyone during the boot process, in case it fails, or panics.
[editline]1st September 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=nikomo;48592272]The "systemd su" is yet another one of those things retards around the world look at, see that it can do one thing, and then claim it's specifically meant for that.
It's a part of machinectl, which is meant for container management. But because it uses systemd to do that, yes, you can login to the systemd session of your current computer, instead of a container on a dedicated server in a datacenter.
It's more like SSH'ing to localhost than su. SSH can do a hell of a lot more, than just connect to the local machine, too.[/QUOTE]
But what makes it a good idea? I don't get the hype around this. It seems like yet another thing that we already have plenty of great tools for, except now it's "well integrated" in systemd, and will not work without it.
What's with systemd turning into a giant blob of random crap? It reminds me of the very first times I attempted programming, when I'd try to make my programs do EVERYTHING.
Systemd only distro when
[QUOTE=Protocol7;48592557]Systemd only distro when[/QUOTE]
They're already there, what are you talking about?
[QUOTE=mastersrp;48592386]But what makes it a good idea? I don't get the hype around this.[/QUOTE]
I've not seen any "hype" regarding it, it's just a tool you can use.
It just makes jumping into a systemd container real nice and easy.
People keep confusing systemd the init system, and systemd the software project. Can't exactly blame those people, when the naming is so confusing, but it's still annoying as hell.
Have anyone here tried kernel 4.2?
[QUOTE=Angus725;48593947]Have anyone here tried kernel 4.2?[/QUOTE]
I tried to try it, but had some issues with LUKS. Really looking forwards though, mainly for the power management improvements on Haswell.
[QUOTE=mastersrp;48592386]But why would you want things like firefox to be available when you're booting?[/quote]
When did I ever say that?
[quote]Hell, I'd even say that syslinux, linux, dracut, and busybox, should get you places you wouldn't dream of. And that should be enough for anyone during the boot process, in case it fails, or panics.[/QUOTE]
I believe mount is contained in /sbin for the very reason of "you can still get your stuff if boot screws up".
Friend of the family gave me a HP NC8000 laptop from 2004 with amazing 512mb ram and a 1.6-GHz Intel Pentium M.
Thinking of putting Linux Mint with Xfce on it. Any other alternatives, tho keep in mind that I am not that good when it comes to "do it your own" things as with Arch.
[QUOTE=lavacano;48594927]When did I ever say that?
I believe mount is contained in /sbin for the very reason of "you can still get your stuff if boot screws up".[/QUOTE]
But if the boot stuff screws up, you should be in the initramfs, not in the ACTUAL fs. So why does it matter? If the file system is broken, that's another deal, but if the boot process fucks up, you do not want to rely on what is on your root fs, in case something there is broken, and broke the boot process.
For those that might be interested. There is a new addition to GNU's site. [URL="https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-microsoft.en.html"]Microsoft's Software is Malware[/URL].
[QUOTE=TheCreeper;48603568]For those that might be interested. There is a new addition to GNU's site. [URL="https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-microsoft.en.html"]Microsoft's Software is Malware[/URL].[/QUOTE]
I read the entire article in Stallman's voice, but holy shit that crap is genuinely enraging.
[QUOTE=TheCreeper;48603568]For those that might be interested. There is a new addition to GNU's site. [URL="https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-microsoft.en.html"]Microsoft's Software is Malware[/URL].[/QUOTE]
I knew it was bad, I didn't know it was THAT bad
[QUOTE=TheCreeper;48582882]Good News. su is now fixed and merged into systemd.
[QUOTE]su is really a broken concept. It will given you kind of a shell, and it’s fine to use it for that, but it’s not a full login, and shouldn’t be mistaken for one.[/QUOTE]
Lennart Poettering
[URL="https://tlhp.cf/lennart-poettering-su/"]source[/URL][/QUOTE]
Does this mean I have to use 'machinectl shell' instead of 'su' just to run a command on a non-sudoers account?
[editline]3rd September 2015[/editline]
Am I even supposed to use su for that?
Trying to install Linux - specifically Ubuntu Gnome - on my desktop.
It's got an ASRock M8-z87 mobo with a GTX 970 and an i3-4870.
It installs, runs, but neither Nouveau nor official nVidia drivers give me 1920x1080. Tried fucking with xorg, installing drivers from "Additional Drivers", and installing the drivers from nVidia's website. Nada.
Nvidia gives me 800x600 vs 640x480, but... bleh. No thanks! Any ideas?
[QUOTE=Protocol7;48610716]Trying to install Linux - specifically Ubuntu Gnome - on my desktop.
It's got an ASRock M8-z87 mobo with a GTX 970 and an i3-4870.
It installs, runs, but neither Nouveau nor official nVidia drivers give me 1920x1080. Tried fucking with xorg, installing drivers from "Additional Drivers", and installing the drivers from nVidia's website. Nada.
Nvidia gives me 800x600 vs 640x480, but... bleh. No thanks! Any ideas?[/QUOTE]
Try using [url]https://launchpad.net/~graphics-drivers/+archive/ubuntu/ppa[/url] , the nvidia installer can do things wrong, and the Ubuntu drivers may be too old. That's the newer drivers packaged for Ubuntu. You could try using xrandr to set your resolution.
Added that ppa and none of the packages were available, nothing from it came up when I searched the apt-cache too. Strange. Found another ppa with 355 on it, though, and it seems to work a bit better; at least I have a 1366x768 option, which beats 800x600.
I'll try xrandr to add a 1080p mode.
Great I installed Debian 8.1 on my netbook last night and I just found out that they're releasing 8.2 tomorrow
[QUOTE=Adam.GameDev;48613316]Great I installed Debian 8.1 on my netbook last night and I just found out that they're releasing 8.2 tomorrow[/QUOTE]
That's exactly what happened to me with Fedora.
just run apt-get upgrade what's the issue
Because if I had known I would have just installed from an 8.2 ISO
[editline]4th September 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Levelog;48613321]That's exactly what happened to me with Fedora.[/QUOTE]
I finally set up Fedora 20 on a VPS once then i found out that 20 wasn't even supported anymore and 22 came out the next day
[img]http://imgur.com/nLc7q2m.png[/img]
Pacman what the fuck are you doing
[QUOTE=supervoltage;48618859][img]http://imgur.com/nLc7q2m.png[/img]
Pacman what the fuck are you doing[/QUOTE]
Are your mirrors setup properly?
[QUOTE=EmilioGB;48618913]Are your mirrors setup properly?[/QUOTE]
Everything is set up correctly and the update finished in the end, I was just downloading ArmA 3 on Steam (it released for Linux) and I decided to update my system in the meantime. For some reason I ended up having negative download speeds :v:
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
