Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Robert Holtzman hol...@cox.net wrote: On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 09:15:11AM -0800, Matt Alexander wrote: Sure, using find or which, etc., can be used to locate a particular app, but that's not really the point. Why not simplify things and put all binaries under /usr/bin? Then you don't have to teach users about silly distinctions like Oh, see, if it's an app that's meant to be used by a System Adminstrator, then it goes into /usr/sbin. Who cares? Just put everything in /usr/bin to keep things simple. There are programs that an admin doesn't want users to run. You're kidding, right? -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/
Sure, using find or which, etc., can be used to locate a particular app, but that's not really the point. Why not simplify things and put all binaries under /usr/bin? Then you don't have to teach users about silly distinctions like Oh, see, if it's an app that's meant to be used by a System Adminstrator, then it goes into /usr/sbin. Who cares? Just put everything in /usr/bin to keep things simple. On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 4:24 AM, Dane Mutters dmutt...@gmail.com wrote: I don't know if the original poster has since learned this, but I think it's worth noting several things, in case the person coming over from Windows hasn't figured it out. (If this is a non-issue, please disregard this email.) 1) Linux/Unix executables don't have a .exe extension. Typically, they don't have any extension at all, and can conceivably have every extension imaginable (including common ones like .sh for scripts). If you're looking for an executable, forget looking for its extension. Try using the find command to look for executable files, or if you know the one you want, already, use the which command, as above. 2) You almost certainly don't need to find that file. As mentioned above, if it's not in your PATH setting, then something is broken. This is pretty rare. If you need to execute a command--from a terminal or from an open with dialogue, just type the command (in the appropriate dialogue box, as needed). If you want to open a PDF, and the GUI hasn't figured out how to do that, type acroread, evince, or whatever you have installed into the box. 3) rant +1 about Windows having an absurdly hard-to-use filesystem, where finding binaries/executables is concerned. Once you learn Linux, you'll bless its build-in filesystem, and probably find little/no need to mess with it. For that matter, +1 to all the stuff about /bin, /sbin, /usr/local/bin, /usr/local/sbin, /opt, etc. having useful, specific purposes. Sure, it bugs me when some program insists on installing someplace I don't think makes sense. Usually it'll let me change it upon install, if it's from a script, but if not, I can still put it into the PATH if it's not already there, and after that it doesn't matter! So long as the uninstall functionality works for a given program (which it REALLY, REALLY should...), and the executable structure of the program is remotely sensible (looking at you, OpenOffice, Mozilla, etc.), it's all gravy, so far as I'm concerned. Proprietary programs are the more problematic culprits, anyway, and there's not much a distribution can do about them, so far as I'm aware. /rant 4) I've never liked Fedora, anyway. :-p I'm sure the real gurus here know a lot more about the specifics than I do, so have at it! --Dane On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 3:16 AM, Colin Watson cjwat...@ubuntu.com wrote: On Sat, Nov 05, 2011 at 02:40:31AM +0800, John McCabe-Dansted wrote: We could even enhance which to look in obvious places off the path (perhaps locatedb?) and print the output on stderr if we really wanted to. Please don't - 'which' is used in scripts and needs to preserve its current behaviour. Any extra behaviour should be added to a different/new program. -- Colin Watson [cjwat...@ubuntu.com] -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Unity and Classic
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Sebastien Bacher seb...@ubuntu.com wrote: Le 01/12/2011 17:11, Matt Alexander a écrit : I don't like it because I can't find the most common apps anymore. I used to be able to navigate through the Applications menu using general categories like Graphics, Games, Sound Video, etc. Is the issue there only the number of click to display the application lens with the installed applications not reduced to the default 1 line and with the filters on the side? This cycle Unity should make it things a bit easier there by: - letting you add lenses icons directly to the launcher, if you access often the application one you could get it there - remember some of the dash settings cross sessions Would you be happy with the application lens if it opened directly from the launcher with filters already on screen and the list unfolded for you? I'm not sure what application lens means. When I click the Ubuntu icon, I get a full screen of 8 icons. Let's say I'm interested in that Brain game that I used to play on 10.04, but can't remember what the actual name was. So I type brain. I get an empty page back. Hmm, OK, well, let's try something else. How do I get back? I have to click the Ubuntu icon twice. The first makes the blank results page go away. The second brings back the default 8 icons. I then click More Apps. Hmm, it's not in the short displayed list of apps. I then click the tiny text that says, See 89 more results and scroll through lots of apps until I find the brain icon that I remember from 10.04. That's quite a bit of work compared to 10.04. I totally missed the Filter results option before. If that list of categories was available after clicking the Ubuntu icon, then I'd be happy. I could then simply go Ubuntu icon - Games - gbrainy. Another idea... let's say I want to use gimp (and it's not installed yet), so I type in gimp into the search box. Instead of a confusing blank page, provide a link to install the gimp package. Thanks for considering this. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Moving all binaries to /usr/bin ?
Interesting proposed change for the location of binaries in Fedora: http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Fedora-considers-moving-all-binaries-to-usr-bin-1369642.html Would Ubuntu consider doing the same? -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Cleaning up the users and locking down the shells in /etc/passwd
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 8:06 AM, Colin Watson cjwat...@ubuntu.com wrote: On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 06:12:24AM -0700, Matt Alexander wrote: On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 1:28 AM, Colin Watson cjwat...@ubuntu.com wrote: I'm afraid this is backwards. If you want to go and hunt down packages that rely on those global static users and get their maintainers (preferably in Debian) to work on a migration to dynamically-allocated system users, perhaps after that it would be worth removing the global static users. Until then, they need to stay where they are. Seems like detecting broken packages from system changes would already be part of the Ubuntu qual. process. It's always better to not break things in the first place. Sometimes breaking things is necessary for forward progress. But, OK, I'll setup a box, remove users, and run a script that installs/uninstalls everything one by one from the default repos and makes note of any packages that break. I'll then open bugs with the Debian maintainers of those packages to modify their install/uninstall script. Sounds great, thanks! Note that I will not remove these users in any event: root (obviously) daemon (required by LSB) bin (required by LSB) sync (specialised, described in users-and-groups documentation) games (shared among many packages, likely to be too disruptive) man (man-db is widely installed anyway so any gain is not worth it) mail (often has many non-system-owned files, too disruptive) www-data (often has many non-system-owned files, too disruptive) nobody (obviously) You can refer to /usr/share/doc/base-passwd/users-and-groups.txt.gz for what's known about various system users. Great info. Thanks! -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
