Re: Is there such a distro?
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 8:59 AM, Solor Vox wrote: > On 2 June 2010 10:31, Jim Cheetham wrote: >> If you are the owner of the computer in question and you are >> "competant", there is no reason at all not to use root all the time. >> Just set your uid to 0 and be done with it. I'm as serious with that >> comment as I am with "writing passwords down", i.e. very serious. >> > This is both horrible and dangerous advice. First, we are human and I Not really. It's an extreme position and I put the word "competent" in quotes. Personally, I don't run as UID 0 (although on my main workstation only I do permit sudo with no password for my user). I'm not going to bother with a point-by-point discussion of your comments, they're all sufficiently correct. I just don't agree that they are situations you need to guard against too strongly on a workstation where you should be able to rebuild from an ISO with minimal impact at short notice. That sounds a little bit like moving the goalposts for the discussion, but it's part of the definition of "competent" ... :-) >> However, if you are *not* the owner (i.e. in any business context) >> then sudo provides a very valuable audit log experience. You have 5 > > Sure, sudo helps with logs if the admins use it. Well, don't give them the choice. I'm talking about production systems in a professional services model (ITIL etc), not just a bunch of guys logging on to a webserver somewhere to hack on their blogs. In these environments, audit is far more important than giving the admin a pleasant work environment .. -jim
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Thu 03 Jun 2010 10:04:25 NZST +1200, aidal...@no8wireless.co.nz wrote: > By the way, it's only five extra keystrokes to prefix a command with > "sudo ". And exactly why do you think commands are called mv, rm, and ls? ;-) Volker -- Volker Kuhlmann http://volker.dnsalias.net/ Please do not CC list postings to me.
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Thu 03 Jun 2010 16:03:38 NZST +1200, Nick Rout wrote: > physical access means root access! Only if you can boot from CD/USB stick (which any lab admin has disabled), or if you manage to disassemble the computer while the lab admin looks at you holding his baseball bat. Good luck. On the list of reasons why "you couldn't possibly afford a root password on a lab computer" is pretty darn silly, which haven't been mentioned: * The admin might have a very good reason to need or want it. * If your root password can be brute-forced during a lab class, you sure didn't deserve any better anyway. * It's a research institution, so playing with the security system where the potential damage is marginal is part of the game. I know admins who just shrug their shoulders for this very reason, as long as no actual damage takes place. * Did someone go there to get a degree, or to be kicked off campus by the acceptable use policy? But the most annoying thing about sudo is the crowd of Buntunistas(TM) who think everyone absolutely has to use it everytime everywhere just because it's the default for their favourite distro, when benefits are at best arguable and at worst a security problem. It's a tool. It gets used when and if it gives a useful return. Just like with any other tool. Volker -- Volker Kuhlmann http://volker.dnsalias.net/ Please do not CC list postings to me.
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 10:04 AM, wrote: > Peter Glassenbury (CSSE) wrote: >> Sorry not even at a university lab... If someone wants to brute force >> our root account, they obviously have not enough work to do. >> Our logging should find the attempts... >> Like Volker, I have yet to be convinced of the point of typing >> "sudo " in front of all the commands I want to run as root. >> When it becomes reflex, you are going to make the same mistakes >> as if you login as root. > > > True, because the attack would have to be carried out manually, so you > could just pull out the crow bar and stand outside the lab when it > happens, not to mention that it would take forever to reach, say, 100 > attempts, which would hardly make a dent (so to speak). > > There are pros and cons of either choice. For me, it's pointless to > have a root password, because I can never remember what it is, and I > usually only want to execute one command as root at a time, anyway. > But that's just my preference. I can imagine that Pete boots the lab > machines into single-user mode, for which he needs the root password, > to diagnose problems. Even if that was disabled, there could still > only be one password for admins: the BIOS password (for booting from a > CD, for example). > physical access means root access!
Re: Is there such a distro?
Peter Glassenbury (CSSE) wrote: > Sorry not even at a university lab... If someone wants to brute force > our root account, they obviously have not enough work to do. > Our logging should find the attempts... > Like Volker, I have yet to be convinced of the point of typing > "sudo " in front of all the commands I want to run as root. > When it becomes reflex, you are going to make the same mistakes > as if you login as root. True, because the attack would have to be carried out manually, so you could just pull out the crow bar and stand outside the lab when it happens, not to mention that it would take forever to reach, say, 100 attempts, which would hardly make a dent (so to speak). There are pros and cons of either choice. For me, it's pointless to have a root password, because I can never remember what it is, and I usually only want to execute one command as root at a time, anyway. But that's just my preference. I can imagine that Pete boots the lab machines into single-user mode, for which he needs the root password, to diagnose problems. Even if that was disabled, there could still only be one password for admins: the BIOS password (for booting from a CD, for example). By the way, it's only five extra keystrokes to prefix a command with "sudo ". --Aidan signature.asc Description: PGP signature Part 3 Description: micalg/pgp-sha1
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 08:31 +1000, Jim Cheetham wrote: > On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 7:57 AM, Peter Glassenbury (CSSE) > wrote: > > Like Volker, I have yet to be convinced of the point of typing > > "sudo " in front of all the commands I want to run as root. > > When it becomes reflex, you are going to make the same mistakes > > as if you login as root. > > If you are the owner of the computer in question and you are > "competant", there is no reason at all not to use root all the time. > Just set your uid to 0 and be done with it. I'm as serious with that > comment as I am with "writing passwords down", i.e. very serious. > > However, if you are *not* the owner (i.e. in any business context) > then sudo provides a very valuable audit log experience. You have 5 > admins -- which one was it that logged on as root and broke your > production system? With sudo, it is much easier to track back on > problems. You can use sudo to get a root shell, rather than restrict > it to individual commands, if you want the flexibility. > > -jim I am in absolute agreement with both of these statements (although I expect you're waiting for the flame war as well Jim), until it comes to directly accessing remote systems as root - even if it is your server. Having to guess which user account to ssh into ( there are plenty of account name popularity lists around to suggest the ones *not* to use ), as well as the password massively increases security. Add a fail2ban / denyhosts and it'll take a pretty serious distributed attack to succeed. Personally, I add a vpn to the mix as well, and only use raw ssh in an emergency from specific IP addresses. That way they have to find my treehouse in Borneo before going for my servers. ( Oh what a giveaway! ) But in a shared admin environment, the sudo's audit trail gets rid of all those sloping shoulders... and we all make mistakes after all! My $0.02, Steve -- Steve Holdoway http://www.greengecko.co.nz MSN: st...@greengecko.co.nz Skype: sholdowa smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Is there such a distro?
On 2 June 2010 10:31, Jim Cheetham wrote: > If you are the owner of the computer in question and you are > "competant", there is no reason at all not to use root all the time. > Just set your uid to 0 and be done with it. I'm as serious with that > comment as I am with "writing passwords down", i.e. very serious. > This is both horrible and dangerous advice. First, we are human and I don't care how "competent" you are, people make mistakes. Running as a normal user the impact of mistakes are much less. Running as root, a mistake could mean re-install from backups. Second, even if you are on top of what you do, a run away process becomes much more dangerous to the system. The reserve free space (usually 5%) that is there in case of a too full disk doesn't work. Many applications are buggy and depend on user level access to protect the system. (wireshark/and the like) Do you really trust flash/firefox not to do bad things as root? Running as root also has direct access to memory and can kill/modify memory of other processes. > However, if you are *not* the owner (i.e. in any business context) > then sudo provides a very valuable audit log experience. You have 5 > admins -- which one was it that logged on as root and broke your > production system? With sudo, it is much easier to track back on > problems. You can use sudo to get a root shell, rather than restrict > it to individual commands, if you want the flexibility. > > -jim Sure, sudo helps with logs if the admins use it. I use a configuration management systems to ensure things are kept in check. Typically I find that my admins would use it when doing simple things. (vim/restarting services) But if they need to do a lot of work, "sudo su -" is used. With a remote "root" user login it could be any one of the admins. With sudo, the admin user logs in with their account and then runs sudo. So you get some ideas. =) Sudo also allows you to give fine-grained acess controls intead of full root. Allowing junor admins to do x,y,z only is a good thing. (tm) sV
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 7:57 AM, Peter Glassenbury (CSSE) wrote: > Like Volker, I have yet to be convinced of the point of typing > "sudo " in front of all the commands I want to run as root. > When it becomes reflex, you are going to make the same mistakes > as if you login as root. If you are the owner of the computer in question and you are "competant", there is no reason at all not to use root all the time. Just set your uid to 0 and be done with it. I'm as serious with that comment as I am with "writing passwords down", i.e. very serious. However, if you are *not* the owner (i.e. in any business context) then sudo provides a very valuable audit log experience. You have 5 admins -- which one was it that logged on as root and broke your production system? With sudo, it is much easier to track back on problems. You can use sudo to get a root shell, rather than restrict it to individual commands, if you want the flexibility. -jim
Re: Is there such a distro?
> Like Volker, I have yet to be convinced of the point of typing > "sudo " in front of all the commands I want to run as root. > When it becomes reflex, you are going to make the same mistakes > as if you login as root. True true. Still, I like not having a root password. Means I don't have to change it after someone has had a one-off "need" for admin rights. Yes, I know I should be changing it frequently anyway. "sudo su" gives me root when I have lots to do.
Re: Is there such a distro?
On 01/06/10 21:20, Aidan Gauland wrote: Volker Kuhlmann wrote: Ok so can you make do without a root password, but I still don't see why I have to and remain not to be interested. Each to their own. I think you really want to disable root login (entirely) for, say, a university computer-lab. Anyone could switch to a virtual console and anonymously brute-force the root account. Sorry not even at a university lab... If someone wants to brute force our root account, they obviously have not enough work to do. Our logging should find the attempts... Like Volker, I have yet to be convinced of the point of typing "sudo " in front of all the commands I want to run as root. When it becomes reflex, you are going to make the same mistakes as if you login as root. Pete -- --- Peter Glassenbury Computer Science department p...@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz University of Canterbury +64 3 3642987 ext 7762 New Zealand
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Tue, 2010-06-01 at 21:20 +1200, Aidan Gauland wrote: > Volker Kuhlmann wrote: > > Ok so can you make do without a root password, but I still don't see why > > I have to and remain not to be interested. Each to their own. > > I think you really want to disable root login (entirely) for, say, a > university computer-lab. Anyone could switch to a virtual console and > anonymously brute-force the root account. For personal systems, as you said, > each to their own. > > Any system administrators care to start a cool-flame war[1]? ;-) > > --Aidan > > 1 A flame war without third-degree burns. I'd go further: read-only systems, bring your own usb stick/nfs mounts. Run it like a kiosk. Log out, reset. Steve. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Tue, 2010-06-01 at 20:47 +1200, Ryan McCoskrie wrote: [snip] You know Ryan, I still haven't got a clue what you're actually wanting! TBH, any linux, freebsd, Solaris, HP-UX, etc, etc, etc - they all provide a platform for you to run your applications upon. They all talk to each other in the same manner and are built on the same philosophy. Sure I'm generalising, but the differences are trivial. It's a part of the learning process to either embrace them or to learn to use a subset of them that work exactly the same on most platforms. The only real differences are the sysadmin toolkits, and if you're that way inclined, then you need to know those trivialities. Cheers, Steve. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Is there such a distro?
Volker Kuhlmann wrote: > Ok so can you make do without a root password, but I still don't see why > I have to and remain not to be interested. Each to their own. I think you really want to disable root login (entirely) for, say, a university computer-lab. Anyone could switch to a virtual console and anonymously brute-force the root account. For personal systems, as you said, each to their own. Any system administrators care to start a cool-flame war[1]? ;-) --Aidan 1 A flame war without third-degree burns. signature.asc Description: PGP signature signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Ryan McCoskrie wrote: > On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 20:27:07 you wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 8:14 PM, Ryan McCoskrie > wrote: >> > You do if you have a neurotic need to configure every detail but lack the >> > time and bandwidth for Gentoo/Slackware/LFS. >> >> well give it a root password then. What the hell has bandwidth to do >> with configuration? > > Those are the ones most famously in need of heavy configuration to make them > usable on a day to day basis and LFS and Gentoo both need to be downloaded bit > by bit while they are installed as opposed to acquired from a computer > magazine. > The Edgeware Community Centre has a machine with many linux distros on it, you can write a cd. But like any operating system you will constantly upgrading. Things are fixed. They require updating. Security updates. Program improvements. Even a week after release of any new distro version there will be updates.
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 20:27:07 you wrote: > On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 8:14 PM, Ryan McCoskrie wrote: > > You do if you have a neurotic need to configure every detail but lack the > > time and bandwidth for Gentoo/Slackware/LFS. > > well give it a root password then. What the hell has bandwidth to do > with configuration? Those are the ones most famously in need of heavy configuration to make them usable on a day to day basis and LFS and Gentoo both need to be downloaded bit by bit while they are installed as opposed to acquired from a computer magazine.
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 8:14 PM, Ryan McCoskrie wrote: > You do if you have a neurotic need to configure every detail but lack the time > and bandwidth for Gentoo/Slackware/LFS. > well give it a root password then. What the hell has bandwidth to do with configuration?
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Mon, 31 May 2010 12:27:38 you wrote: > On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Ryan McCoskrie > > wrote: > > Okay there have been a few misunderstandings about what I meant in my > > original post on this thread. After some thinking I believe that I can > > clarify myself properly > > > > On Sat, 29 May 2010 13:02:30 you wrote: > >> Are there any desktop centered distros whose primary aim is to have as > >> few surprises as possible for people who are already accustomed to > >> Linux? > > > > By accustomed to Linux I mean that this user is more comfortable with > > Linux than any other system but not necessarily a power user. > > > >> I just want a very generic distro. > > > > By generic I don't just mean desktop centered with no paradigm shifting > > technologies. I mean a system that aims to have as few original > > contributions as possible > > what do you mean "as few original contributions as possible" - do you > mean you want a distro without any special tools that are designed > just for that distro, by the distro maker? > AFAIK that is near impossible without simply repackaging something else (such as the case with CentOS and Redhat). But yeah as few non-universal features as possible and absolutely nothing set up in a unique or near unique way. I suppose the real reason I want a system like what I am trying to describe is so that we can point and say "Well there is no standard Linux but that one works exactly how any junior admin would expect". > If so, ubuntu won't do you as they innovate quite a bit, as does > fedora, as does suse. That comes of having a bunch of paid > developers[1] sitting there developing, innovating and differentiating > their distros. And at times their developments get taken up by other > distros. eg REDHAT package manager is used by a lot of distros besides > Redhat, upstart was developed by Canonical but is now also used by > Fedora and others. > > If you want a very generic system with no distro centered addons then > you perhaps don't want a distro at all, because they all try to > differentiate themselves in some way with some new 'feature'. > > If I still misunderstood what you are after then please explain again. > > > and have a complete out-of-the-box set of programs (GUI and CLI) > > that one would expect out of a Linux based system. > > > > P.S: I know that you can set a root password on Ubuntu but I seam to > > remember other things being dropped because they're of no use to granny. > > You don't need a root password. Ubuntu proves that. > You do if you have a neurotic need to configure every detail but lack the time and bandwidth for Gentoo/Slackware/LFS. > > P.P.S: We're lucky here but there is still need for DVD based systems for > > those without broadband. I was running Fedora without internet any > > connection at all from mid 2006 to the start of 2008. > > [1] OK so fedora's paid developers really work for redhat.
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Tue 01 Jun 2010 12:39:09 NZST +1200, Hadley Rich wrote: > > Even more useful is > > sudo sux > sux sux: Command not found. sux was deprecated some while ago. It's now integrated in su, and runs xauth somehow via pam. A ~/.xauth... is created. It Just Works(TM). > > which gives root the ability to open gui tools. I always take that for granted. (Assuming local user login, not ssh.) > `gksu gedit` > gksu gksu: Command not found. Ok so can you make do without a root password, but I still don't see why I have to and remain not to be interested. Each to their own. Volker -- Volker Kuhlmann http://volker.dnsalias.net/ Please do not CC list postings to me.
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Hadley Rich wrote: > On Tue, 2010-06-01 at 12:23 +1200, Derek Smithies wrote: >> Even more useful is >> sudo sux >> >> which gives root the ability to open gui tools. > > Be careful with using sudo in this mannor. You run the risk of creating > problems for yourself. The same goes for running graphical programs with > sudo like so; > > `sudo gedit` > > If you need to run a graphical program then you should run it with gksu > like so; > > `gksu gedit` > > The reason for this is that sudo (unless invoked with the -i switch) > will run as the user root but with the users environment. > > This may (or may not) cause files in your home directory to be created > or overwritten owned by root. This in turn may effect the ability to run > the program as your normal user in the future. I had a similar problem with ~/.bash_history being owned by root. Probably for that reason.
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Tue, 2010-06-01 at 12:23 +1200, Derek Smithies wrote: > Even more useful is > sudo sux > > which gives root the ability to open gui tools. Be careful with using sudo in this mannor. You run the risk of creating problems for yourself. The same goes for running graphical programs with sudo like so; `sudo gedit` If you need to run a graphical program then you should run it with gksu like so; `gksu gedit` The reason for this is that sudo (unless invoked with the -i switch) will run as the user root but with the users environment. This may (or may not) cause files in your home directory to be created or overwritten owned by root. This in turn may effect the ability to run the program as your normal user in the future. hads -- http://nicegear.co.nz New Zealand's Open Source Hardware Supplier
Re: Is there such a distro?
Solor Vox wrote: $ sudo su - # Even more useful is sudo sux which gives root the ability to open gui tools. Derek -- Derek J Smithies Ph.D. Christchurch, New Zealand -- "How did you make it work??" "the usual, got everything right"
Re: Is there such a distro?
On 31 May 2010 21:44, Steve Holdoway wrote: > Even though you lose the accountability of the sudo log, it still does > add extra protection of not being to remotely log in as root, and > there's no password, no certificate to enable it if/when you get there. If all you're looking to do is prevent root login, sshd_config can do that. Having a "locked" or password scrambled also adds some protection on a local level. > Yes, I know there are other ways of doing it. All have their pros and > cons... and I suppose sudo hasn't been tested by the hackers yet. After > all, DNS was secure as until that happened (: Sudo has flaws and has been attacked by hackers. One of the easiest is exploiting bad/lazy admins who don't set full paths of restricted commands. Example: jdoe ALL = mount jdoe ALL = shutdown jdoe ALL = /usr/bin/rsync One might think that this limits jdoe to run mount, shutdown, and rsync. But there is nothing from stopping them from creating a script or copying bash to a local "mount" and then running that. So you should include full paths, and if possible, arguments. jdoe ALL= /bin/mount /mnt/foo Even though the rsync has a full path, rsync can be used to copy files, so it can be used to copy/delete files as root. There are also some local process escalation tricks involving SMP and threads that allow you to keep root permissions. I think sudo is a great tool, but it's just one of many in my toolbox. sV
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Mon, 2010-05-31 at 22:05 +1200, Aidan Gauland wrote: > Steve Holdoway wrote: > Don't forget user toor! > OK, this is really a BSD thing. :P Ah, the ugly viking, as an Irish cow-orker of mine used to call him (: Steve smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Is there such a distro?
Steve Holdoway wrote: > Even though you lose the accountability of the sudo log, it still does > add extra protection of not being to remotely log in as root, and > there's no password, no certificate to enable it if/when you get there. > > Yes, I know there are other ways of doing it. All have their pros and > cons... and I suppose sudo hasn't been tested by the hackers yet. After > all, DNS was secure as until that happened (: > > I consider remote access available only as joe.bloggs, followed by sudo > to be far safer than being able to ssh in as root. But then risk is a > very subjective thing. Don't forget user toor! OK, this is really a BSD thing. :P --Aidan signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Mon, 2010-05-31 at 20:58 +1200, Solor Vox wrote: > On 31 May 2010 20:31, Volker Kuhlmann wrote: > > And it's the very first thing I always fix on those systems, as I refuse > > to be forced to prefix everything I do with sudo. > > $ sudo su - > # > =) > > sV Even though you lose the accountability of the sudo log, it still does add extra protection of not being to remotely log in as root, and there's no password, no certificate to enable it if/when you get there. Yes, I know there are other ways of doing it. All have their pros and cons... and I suppose sudo hasn't been tested by the hackers yet. After all, DNS was secure as until that happened (: I consider remote access available only as joe.bloggs, followed by sudo to be far safer than being able to ssh in as root. But then risk is a very subjective thing. Steve smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Mon 31 May 2010 20:56:00 NZST +1200, Hadley Rich wrote: > `man sudo` shows that you can use `sudo -i` or `sudo -s` Yes, useful - thanks! Volker -- Volker Kuhlmann http://volker.dnsalias.net/ Please do not CC list postings to me.
Re: Is there such a distro?
On 31 May 2010 20:31, Volker Kuhlmann wrote: > And it's the very first thing I always fix on those systems, as I refuse > to be forced to prefix everything I do with sudo. $ sudo su - # =) sV
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Mon, 2010-05-31 at 20:31 +1200, Volker Kuhlmann wrote: > And it's the very first thing I always fix on those systems, as I > refuse to be forced to prefix everything I do with sudo. People that don't understand sudo often say these sorts of things. `man sudo` shows that you can use `sudo -i` or `sudo -s` hads -- http://nicegear.co.nz New Zealand's Open Source Hardware Supplier
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Mon 31 May 2010 12:27:38 NZST +1200, Nick Rout wrote: > You don't need a root password. Ubuntu proves that. No it doesn't. It only proves that granny doesn't need to do root operation. And it's the very first thing I always fix on those systems, as I refuse to be forced to prefix everything I do with sudo. Volker -- Volker Kuhlmann http://volker.dnsalias.net/ Please do not CC list postings to me.
Re: Is there such a distro?
On 31 May 2010 18:54, Jim Cheetham wrote: > > I think you're really looking for the most old-fashioned distro :-) > The other day I discovered that I still have a Yggdrasil Fall '95 CD. I was going to chuck it out but a powerful sense of premonition and the desire to keep a keepsake stopped me . I'm pretty sure I can still lay my hand on it. I believe it was the first ever LiveCD for linux. You may have it if your want it. -- Sincerely etc. Christopher Sawtell
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Ryan McCoskrie wrote: > By generic I don't just mean desktop centered with no paradigm shifting > technologies. I mean a system that aims to have as few original contributions > as possible and have a complete out-of-the-box set of programs (GUI and CLI) > that one would expect out of a Linux based system. I think you're really looking for the most old-fashioned distro :-) For example, you probably want init scripts in /etc/rc* ... which as many distros as possible are leaving behind ... Debian is the best-managed "old-fashioned" system, but they have package guidelines that mean the installed packages often do not match the upstream author's original intentions; but you didn't explicitly say you wanted to be upstream-compliant. You might enjoy Gobo -- I'm really not sure about the out-of-the-box experience, but the ability to bring in anything upstream and run it with the original author's intended environment is pretty much unparalleled -- there has to be a single kernel, but you can use different libc for different programs if you want, easily. -jim
Re: Is there such a distro?
Ryan McCoskrie wrote: > Okay there have been a few misunderstandings about what I meant in my > original post on this thread. After some thinking I believe that I can clarify > myself properly > On Sat, 29 May 2010 13:02:30 you wrote: >> Are there any desktop centered distros whose primary aim is to have as few >> surprises as possible for people who are already accustomed to Linux? >> > By accustomed to Linux I mean that this user is more comfortable with Linux > than any other system but not necessarily a power user. > >> I just want a very generic distro. >> > By generic I don't just mean desktop centered with no paradigm shifting > technologies. I mean a system that aims to have as few original contributions > as possible and have a complete out-of-the-box set of programs (GUI and CLI) > that one would expect out of a Linux based system. OK, just throwing out a crazy idea here: install DSL or Puppy (or something similar) and put off upgrading for as long as you can stay sane with your system. I don't use either of these regularly -- I use Debian testing -- I'm just throwing out an idea. --Aidan signature.asc Description: PGP signature Part 3 Description: micalg/pgp-sha1
Re: Is there such a distro?
> Okay there have been a few misunderstandings about what I meant in my > original post on this thread. After some thinking I believe that I can > clarify > myself properly > On Sat, 29 May 2010 13:02:30 you wrote: >> Are there any desktop centered distros whose primary aim is to have as >> few >> surprises as possible for people who are already accustomed to Linux? >> > By accustomed to Linux I mean that this user is more comfortable with > Linux > than any other system but not necessarily a power user. > >> I just want a very generic distro. >> > By generic I don't just mean desktop centered with no paradigm shifting > technologies. I mean a system that aims to have as few original > contributions > as possible and have a complete out-of-the-box set of programs (GUI and > CLI) > that one would expect out of a Linux based system. > I too am still not sure what you are after. I have done a fair bit of distro hopping and playing with VM's. If you want to get exactly what you want I would suggest Gentoo or ArchLinux. All of the others are customised by their creators as they think is the best to suit their target user groups. If you do not like them try another. Rob
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Ryan McCoskrie wrote: > Okay there have been a few misunderstandings about what I meant in my > original post on this thread. After some thinking I believe that I can clarify > myself properly > On Sat, 29 May 2010 13:02:30 you wrote: >> Are there any desktop centered distros whose primary aim is to have as few >> surprises as possible for people who are already accustomed to Linux? >> > By accustomed to Linux I mean that this user is more comfortable with Linux > than any other system but not necessarily a power user. > >> I just want a very generic distro. >> > By generic I don't just mean desktop centered with no paradigm shifting > technologies. I mean a system that aims to have as few original contributions > as possible what do you mean "as few original contributions as possible" - do you mean you want a distro without any special tools that are designed just for that distro, by the distro maker? If so, ubuntu won't do you as they innovate quite a bit, as does fedora, as does suse. That comes of having a bunch of paid developers[1] sitting there developing, innovating and differentiating their distros. And at times their developments get taken up by other distros. eg REDHAT package manager is used by a lot of distros besides Redhat, upstart was developed by Canonical but is now also used by Fedora and others. If you want a very generic system with no distro centered addons then you perhaps don't want a distro at all, because they all try to differentiate themselves in some way with some new 'feature'. If I still misunderstood what you are after then please explain again. > and have a complete out-of-the-box set of programs (GUI and CLI) > that one would expect out of a Linux based system. > > P.S: I know that you can set a root password on Ubuntu but I seam to remember > other things being dropped because they're of no use to granny. > You don't need a root password. Ubuntu proves that. > P.P.S: We're lucky here but there is still need for DVD based systems for > those without broadband. I was running Fedora without internet any connection > at all from mid 2006 to the start of 2008. > [1] OK so fedora's paid developers really work for redhat.
Re: Is there such a distro?
Okay there have been a few misunderstandings about what I meant in my original post on this thread. After some thinking I believe that I can clarify myself properly On Sat, 29 May 2010 13:02:30 you wrote: > Are there any desktop centered distros whose primary aim is to have as few > surprises as possible for people who are already accustomed to Linux? > By accustomed to Linux I mean that this user is more comfortable with Linux than any other system but not necessarily a power user. > I just want a very generic distro. > By generic I don't just mean desktop centered with no paradigm shifting technologies. I mean a system that aims to have as few original contributions as possible and have a complete out-of-the-box set of programs (GUI and CLI) that one would expect out of a Linux based system. P.S: I know that you can set a root password on Ubuntu but I seam to remember other things being dropped because they're of no use to granny. P.P.S: We're lucky here but there is still need for DVD based systems for those without broadband. I was running Fedora without internet any connection at all from mid 2006 to the start of 2008.
Re: Is there such a distro?
> Do you use Arch yourself? > And if so, for how long? Long time listener, etc... I've used it for at least a year on my eee 701. I run minimal install with no window manager. Openbox with manual 'startx', and all programs on keybinds, with feh to set background, conky and htop/ntop for stats. Uptime shows ~18s with everything going, and boots into ~45meg of ram. It takes a good day to install if you haven't used /etc/rc.* files before, and weeks of occasional tinkering, but the customise is worth the effort. Arch makes no assumptions. It forces you to custom build for your environment, and it pays off. My 900mhz (underclocked to 630mhz by factory default), boots fast, performs fast (considered package selection helps also (ie. abiword/gnumeric over openoffice, or kazehakase/midori/some chromium variant over firefox). It does whatever you build it to do, and gives incredible satisfaction from that. Pacman (package management) is a tar.gz package manager written in C. It's fast, and a very shallow learning curve away from apt-get for the average ubuntu user. The rolling release model is a trade-off for stability (I use debian lenny on my server), but not installing fresh or having to deal with an apt-get dist-upgrade is nice (perhaps it has improved since I've used it, but a system upgrade will always be messy). It's made command line fun for me. And being able to use vi, at least a little bit, definitely helps on a foreign system, or when you don't have a display or a mouse... -- Chris Darby
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Sat, 2010-05-29 at 14:38 +1200, Ryan McCoskrie wrote: > On Sat, 29 May 2010 13:44:11 you wrote: > > On Sat, 2010-05-29 at 13:02 +1200, Ryan McCoskrie wrote: > > > I just want a very generic distro. > > > > Whay do you mean? I'd've called most of those you mentioned 'generic', > > as opposed to - say - myth, voyage, etc. > > > A distro aiming at as few surprises as possible. > Most of what I have mentioned are relatively generic but all > have some surprises. Fedora has become particularly annoying > to upgrade and Ubuntu tries to prevent serious tinkering etc, etc. What surprises? debian, CentOS, ubuntu are all generic things. Can't comment on how bleeding edge Fed is these days. set a root password on Ubuntu and it's more like an up-to-date debian... which is good! The problem I have with what you're asking is that there are different versions of a distro for a reason. eg Ubuntu... LTS for servers, standard for desktops, xubuntu for older machines, netbook remix for... and so on. > > > Are you after minimal, like a vanilla debian net install? > > > No, full desktop from a disk. You'll really need a dvd for that then... Cheers, Steve smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Sat, 2010-05-29 at 17:19 +1200, Nick Rout wrote: > On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Christopher Sawtell > wrote: > > On 29 May 2010 16:41, Nick Rout wrote: > > Only in the context of LinHES, but I have been following the forums > and so forth and thinking about giving it a go on my laptop. If you do, would appreciate an email on how it works, issues etc. Pretty near had Ubuntu Cheers Chris T
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Christopher Sawtell wrote: > On 29 May 2010 16:41, Nick Rout wrote: >> >> On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Christopher Sawtell >> wrote: >> > On 29 May 2010 15:03 chris wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sat, 2010-05-29 at 14:38 +1200, Ryan McCoskrie wrote: >> >> > On Sat, 29 May 2010 13:44:11 you wrote: >> >> > > On Sat, 2010-05-29 at 13:02 +1200, Ryan McCoskrie wrote: >> >> > > > I just want a very generic distro. >> >> > > >> >> > > Whay do you mean? I'd've called most of those you mentioned >> >> > > 'generic', >> >> > > as opposed to - say - myth, voyage, etc. >> >> > > >> >> > A distro aiming at as few surprises as possible. >> >> > Most of what I have mentioned are relatively generic but all >> >> > have some surprises. Fedora has become particularly annoying >> >> > to upgrade and Ubuntu tries to prevent serious tinkering etc, etc. >> >> Amen >> >> cheers Chris T >> >> >> > >> > In that case I reckon you need one of the DIY distros. e.g. >> > >> > Linux from Scratch. http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/ >> > Source Mage. http://sourcemage.org/ >> > >> > Gentoo http://www.gentoo.org/ is also a possibility, but you mention >> > that as >> > being undesirable. >> > >> > I'm sure some of us would be prepared to set up our machines as hosts in >> > a >> > compiler farm for you. >> > >> > Volunteers CLUGgers? >> >> Been there done that! Anyway you already mentioned Sabayon which is >> gentoo anyway. > > Not entirely. There is another very necessary layer of QA and it shows. It's > sensibly pre-compiled with appropriately sensible use flags. They have > obviously expended a considerable amount of energy setting up the packages > to both look nice and run properly. KDE-4.4.3 is a dream. Last but not least > it has a completely new and different package management system which > actually seems to work really well. > >> I suggest Arch Linux, has a rolling release and good packaging system, >> good docos, good community. Many people swear by it. You'll get your >> hands dirty but not as much as for LFS or gentoo. > > Do you use Arch yourself? > And if so, for how long? Only in the context of LinHES, but I have been following the forums and so forth and thinking about giving it a go on my laptop.
Re: Is there such a distro?
On 29 May 2010 16:41, Nick Rout wrote: > On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Christopher Sawtell > wrote: > > On 29 May 2010 15:03 chris wrote: > >> > >> On Sat, 2010-05-29 at 14:38 +1200, Ryan McCoskrie wrote: > >> > On Sat, 29 May 2010 13:44:11 you wrote: > >> > > On Sat, 2010-05-29 at 13:02 +1200, Ryan McCoskrie wrote: > >> > > > I just want a very generic distro. > >> > > > >> > > Whay do you mean? I'd've called most of those you mentioned > 'generic', > >> > > as opposed to - say - myth, voyage, etc. > >> > > > >> > A distro aiming at as few surprises as possible. > >> > Most of what I have mentioned are relatively generic but all > >> > have some surprises. Fedora has become particularly annoying > >> > to upgrade and Ubuntu tries to prevent serious tinkering etc, etc. > >> Amen > >> cheers Chris T > >> > > > > In that case I reckon you need one of the DIY distros. e.g. > > > > Linux from Scratch. http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/ > > Source Mage. http://sourcemage.org/ > > > > Gentoo http://www.gentoo.org/ is also a possibility, but you mention > that as > > being undesirable. > > > > I'm sure some of us would be prepared to set up our machines as hosts in > a > > compiler farm for you. > > > > Volunteers CLUGgers? > > Been there done that! Anyway you already mentioned Sabayon which is > gentoo anyway. > Not entirely. There is another very necessary layer of QA and it shows. It's sensibly pre-compiled with appropriately sensible use flags. They have obviously expended a considerable amount of energy setting up the packages to both look nice and run properly. KDE-4.4.3 is a dream. Last but not least it has a completely new and different package management system which actually seems to work really well. I suggest Arch Linux, has a rolling release and good packaging system, > good docos, good community. Many people swear by it. You'll get your > hands dirty but not as much as for LFS or gentoo. > Do you use Arch yourself? And if so, for how long? -- Sincerely etc. Christopher Sawtell
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Christopher Sawtell wrote: > On 29 May 2010 15:03 chris wrote: >> >> On Sat, 2010-05-29 at 14:38 +1200, Ryan McCoskrie wrote: >> > On Sat, 29 May 2010 13:44:11 you wrote: >> > > On Sat, 2010-05-29 at 13:02 +1200, Ryan McCoskrie wrote: >> > > > I just want a very generic distro. >> > > >> > > Whay do you mean? I'd've called most of those you mentioned 'generic', >> > > as opposed to - say - myth, voyage, etc. >> > > >> > A distro aiming at as few surprises as possible. >> > Most of what I have mentioned are relatively generic but all >> > have some surprises. Fedora has become particularly annoying >> > to upgrade and Ubuntu tries to prevent serious tinkering etc, etc. >> Amen >> cheers Chris T >> > > In that case I reckon you need one of the DIY distros. e.g. > > Linux from Scratch. http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/ > Source Mage. http://sourcemage.org/ > > Gentoo http://www.gentoo.org/ is also a possibility, but you mention that as > being undesirable. > > I'm sure some of us would be prepared to set up our machines as hosts in a > compiler farm for you. > > Volunteers CLUGgers? Been there done that! Anyway you already mentioned Sabayon which is gentoo anyway. I suggest Arch Linux, has a rolling release and good packaging system, good docos, good community. Many people swear by it. You'll get your hands dirty but not as much as for LFS or gentoo.
Re: Is there such a distro?
On 29 May 2010 15:03 chris wrote: > On Sat, 2010-05-29 at 14:38 +1200, Ryan McCoskrie wrote: > > On Sat, 29 May 2010 13:44:11 you wrote: > > > On Sat, 2010-05-29 at 13:02 +1200, Ryan McCoskrie wrote: > > > > I just want a very generic distro. > > > > > > Whay do you mean? I'd've called most of those you mentioned 'generic', > > > as opposed to - say - myth, voyage, etc. > > > > > A distro aiming at as few surprises as possible. > > Most of what I have mentioned are relatively generic but all > > have some surprises. Fedora has become particularly annoying > > to upgrade and Ubuntu tries to prevent serious tinkering etc, etc. > Amen > cheers Chris T > > In that case I reckon you need one of the DIY distros. e.g. Linux from Scratch. http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/ Source Mage. http://sourcemage.org/ Gentoo http://www.gentoo.org/ is also a possibility, but you mention that as being undesirable. I'm sure some of us would be prepared to set up our machines as hosts in a compiler farm for you. Volunteers CLUGgers? -- Sincerely etc. Christopher Sawtell
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Sat, 2010-05-29 at 14:38 +1200, Ryan McCoskrie wrote: > On Sat, 29 May 2010 13:44:11 you wrote: > > On Sat, 2010-05-29 at 13:02 +1200, Ryan McCoskrie wrote: > > > I just want a very generic distro. > > > > Whay do you mean? I'd've called most of those you mentioned 'generic', > > as opposed to - say - myth, voyage, etc. > > > A distro aiming at as few surprises as possible. > Most of what I have mentioned are relatively generic but all > have some surprises. Fedora has become particularly annoying > to upgrade and Ubuntu tries to prevent serious tinkering etc, etc. Amen cheers Chris T
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Sat, 2010-05-29 at 13:02 +1200, Ryan McCoskrie wrote: > Are there any desktop centered distros whose primary aim is to have as few > surprises as possible for people who are already accustomed to Linux? > > So far all of the distros I have seen (old Knoppix, Red Hat, Linspire, > Ubuntu, > Fedora, Kubuntu, Slackware, Mandriva, Open Suse, Gentoo, Debian and a few > others that I have tried for an afternoon or so) have had some other primary > goal. > > I just want a very generic distro. > > > P.S: If anyone with the resources wants to start up such a distro I'm willing > to help. Debian stable, or PC linux os, or "run a google for roll your own Linux. Sorry can not remember the url Cheeers the kiwi
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Sat, 29 May 2010 13:44:11 you wrote: > On Sat, 2010-05-29 at 13:02 +1200, Ryan McCoskrie wrote: > > I just want a very generic distro. > > Whay do you mean? I'd've called most of those you mentioned 'generic', > as opposed to - say - myth, voyage, etc. > A distro aiming at as few surprises as possible. Most of what I have mentioned are relatively generic but all have some surprises. Fedora has become particularly annoying to upgrade and Ubuntu tries to prevent serious tinkering etc, etc. > Are you after minimal, like a vanilla debian net install? > No, full desktop from a disk.
Re: Is there such a distro?
On Sat, 2010-05-29 at 13:02 +1200, Ryan McCoskrie wrote: > > I just want a very generic distro. Whay do you mean? I'd've called most of those you mentioned 'generic', as opposed to - say - myth, voyage, etc. Are you after minimal, like a vanilla debian net install? Cheers, Steve -- Steve Holdoway http://www.greengecko.co.nz MSN: st...@greengecko.co.nz Skype: sholdowa smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Is there such a distro?
On 29 May 2010 13:02, Ryan McCoskrie wrote: > Are there any desktop centered distros whose primary aim is to have as few > surprises as possible for people who are already accustomed to Linux? > > So far all of the distros I have seen (old Knoppix, Red Hat, Linspire, > Ubuntu, Fedora, Kubuntu, Slackware, Mandriva, Open Suse, Gentoo, Debian and > a few others that I have tried for an afternoon or so) have had some other > primary > goal. > > I just want a very generic distro. > > I have found Sabayon pretty good. The CoreCD version would probably do what you want pretty well. http://forum.sabayon.org/viewtopic.php?f=60&t=20421 There is also a distro called 'Caclculate-Linux' which is similar, and quite possibly somewhat better. http://www.calculate-linux.org/en I have played with the Live CD and was pretty impressed. I have not installed it because - after a bunch of upgrades - Sabayon became rough enough for my simple needs. > P.S: If anyone with the resources wants to start up such a distro I'm > willing to help. > Sorry no, there are umpteen thousand Linux distros available already, and I am now strictly in 'user mode' as far as computing is concerned. i.e. I don't need or want the stress. -- Sincerely etc. Christopher Sawtell
