Dennis Clarke wrote:
That's why I think that just setting the home directory for root to /root
is fine for 99.8762% of things. Except vipw of course and who knows
what else breaks.
vipw IIRC has been fixed already.
What are things like in the AIX world Derek ? Is the root user at /
Hmmm...
And the MS-WIN GUI is only "easy to use" for the people who spend a long
time to learn it's oddness.
Naturlich. Deutsch ist besser als Englisch. Also, wir mussen Deustch
sprechen. Vielleicht, die Welt wird eines Tages die Wahrheit wissen!
The same can be said for English...so why d
>> No Sir, I don't think so.
>>
>> I would simply employ more of the RBAC features and perhaps create a user
>> called admin with considerable influence as well as enable *some* of the
>> audit features in Solaris. One has to be careful with that however as you
>> can fill a disk with audit logs
Dennis Clarke wrote:
Menno Lageman wrote:
Dennis Clarke wrote:
I personally have always wondered why the ps command display what
root is
doing to ordinary users like as if it is any of their business but that
is another idea I just let rattle around in my head.
Dennis,
You can do this (in
On Sun, 14 Jan 2007, David Lloyd wrote:
I'm not so sure we've got the culprit here. I'd blame X...they're
just as painful in Linux and FreeBSD.
Uhm, XRandR? One big limitation is that the modelist isn't dynamic -
that's being worked on by the XOrg people (google for XRandR 1.2).
regards,
--
>And the less you can do as a normal user, the more people will be
>tempted to run as root all the time. Life (and hence security) is full
>of these little tradeoffs.
Not if you can't. (I.e., this is a fine configuration for systems where
there are many non-root users; not so in the case were
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The reason why Windows is so easy to install is only because it
> comes pre-installed.
And the MS-WIN GUI is only "easy to use" for the people who spend a long
time to learn it's oddness.
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[
Josip Gracin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dennis Clarke wrote:
> > But let's face it .. it isn't. UNIX and Linux are not for the masses
> > and no amount of snazzy graphics or a tetris game in the installer will make
> > it easy.
>
> You've deliberately left out Mac OS X, right? Because that se
> Menno Lageman wrote:
>> Dennis Clarke wrote:
>>>
>>> I personally have always wondered why the ps command display what
>>> root is
>>> doing to ordinary users like as if it is any of their business but that
>>> is another idea I just let rattle around in my head.
>>>
>>
>> Dennis,
>>
>> You c
Menno Lageman wrote:
Dennis Clarke wrote:
I personally have always wondered why the ps command display what
root is
doing to ordinary users like as if it is any of their business but that
is another idea I just let rattle around in my head.
Dennis,
You can do this (in Solaris 10 and up
>
>> But let's face it .. it isn't. UNIX and Linux are not for the masses
>>and no amount of snazzy graphics or a tetris game in the installer will
>> make
>>it easy. I just have a minimal expectation that the current feature set
>> are
>>reflected in some way in the installer. Like ZFS as an o
> Dennis Clarke wrote:
>> But let's face it .. it isn't. UNIX and Linux are not for the masses
>> and no amount of snazzy graphics or a tetris game in the installer will
>> make
>> it easy.
>
> You've deliberately left out Mac OS X, right? Because that seems to be
> a Unix which hides the compl
"Dennis Clarke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Like why isn't ifconfig the same command in Linux, UNIX and Windows ? Why
> does Windows use ipconfig ? Because Bill wanted the command to be different
> I guess. Not sure.
MS-WIN "ipconfig" is closer to the UNIX ifconfig than the Linux ifconfig is ;
> But let's face it .. it isn't. UNIX and Linux are not for the masses
>and no amount of snazzy graphics or a tetris game in the installer will make
>it easy. I just have a minimal expectation that the current feature set are
>reflected in some way in the installer. Like ZFS as an option for
>f
Dennis Clarke wrote:
But let's face it .. it isn't. UNIX and Linux are not for the masses
and no amount of snazzy graphics or a tetris game in the installer will make
it easy.
You've deliberately left out Mac OS X, right? Because that seems to be
a Unix which hides the complexity pretty wel
> Dennis Clarke wrote:
>>
>> I personally have always wondered why the ps command display what root is
>> doing to ordinary users like as if it is any of their business but that
>> is another idea I just let rattle around in my head.
>>
>
> Dennis,
>
> You can do this (in Solaris 10 and up) by
Dennis Clarke wrote:
I personally have always wondered why the ps command display what root is
doing to ordinary users like as if it is any of their business but that
is another idea I just let rattle around in my head.
Dennis,
You can do this (in Solaris 10 and up) by taking away the pro
Dennis Clarke wrote:
Wow. Guys, the civilization came to a point where well-behaved dogs no
longer go crazy at the sight of a cat. Why would Solaris fans should be
different at the sound of the word "Linux" ;) A welcome into the world
of Solaris should be more welcome.
no one was barking
la
>
> Wow. Guys, the civilization came to a point where well-behaved dogs no
> longer go crazy at the sight of a cat. Why would Solaris fans should be
> different at the sound of the word "Linux" ;) A welcome into the world
> of Solaris should be more welcome.
no one was barking
Dennis Clarke
Wow. Guys, the civilization came to a point where well-behaved dogs no
longer go crazy at the sight of a cat. Why would Solaris fans should be
different at the sound of the word "Linux" ;) A welcome into the world
of Solaris should be more welcome.
Noel, I think most your questions has been
> On Sat, 13 Jan 2007, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>
>> I think we need to point out to our Linux friends that once they do this
>> that will will pollute the root directory with crud. Things like the
>> .bash_history and if they actually login vie dtlogin/gdm or whatever that
>> they will really bork
> On Sat, 13 Jan 2007, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>
>> Rich, you need to ask the question "why was I there?" of all people?
>
> Nope!
>
>> you *know* where I stand on Linux vs Solaris issues.
>
> Yep; you're about as anti-Linux as me. :-)
not really ... I have spent a fair amount of time with Deb
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007, Dennis Clarke wrote:
I think we need to point out to our Linux friends that once they do this
that will will pollute the root directory with crud. Things like the
.bash_history and if they actually login vie dtlogin/gdm or whatever that
they will really bork it up wwith ju
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> Rich, you need to ask the question "why was I there?" of all people?
Nope!
> you *know* where I stand on Linux vs Solaris issues.
Yep; you're about as anti-Linux as me. :-)
> The collection of Linux sysadmins were laughing and saying outright
> On Sat, 13 Jan 2007, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>
>> [1] the thing booted after install with a text console and pumped out
>> errors
>> about X this that and the other thing. I suspect a broken FX-1200
>> but then again .. the console worked fine in text mode. :-(
>>
>> This was just a j
> Dennis Clarke wrote:
>
>>
>> But let's face it .. it isn't. UNIX and Linux are not for the masses
>>and no amount of snazzy graphics or a tetris game in the installer will
>> make
>>it easy. I just have a minimal expectation that the current feature set
>> are
>>reflected in some way in the in
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> [1] the thing booted after install with a text console and pumped out errors
> about X this that and the other thing. I suspect a broken FX-1200
> but then again .. the console worked fine in text mode. :-(
>
> This was just a joke for the
Dennis Clarke wrote:
>
> But let's face it .. it isn't. UNIX and Linux are not for the masses
>and no amount of snazzy graphics or a tetris game in the installer will make
>it easy. I just have a minimal expectation that the current feature set are
>reflected in some way in the installer. Like
On Sun, 14 Jan 2007, David Lloyd wrote:
> I wonder if a "Migrating from Linux" community exists...
Of course there is--it's part of the OpenSolaris community. :-)
Actually, more seriously, I think this is the sort of thing that
the Immigrants Community on opensolaris.org is for...
--
Rich Tee
> Dennis,
>
>>> I'm not so sure we've got the culprit here. I'd blame X...they're just
>>> as painful in Linux and FreeBSD.
>>
>> Well, I'm not a Linux guy ya know? But it feels like lately when I
>> install Red Hat Enterprise Linux or SUSE Enterpoop Linux 10 or boot a
>> KnoppiX DVD that every
Dennis,
I'm not so sure we've got the culprit here. I'd blame X...they're just
as painful in Linux and FreeBSD.
Well, I'm not a Linux guy ya know? But it feels like lately when I
install Red Hat Enterprise Linux or SUSE Enterpoop Linux 10 or boot a
KnoppiX DVD that everything looks sweet a
> Dennis,
>
>> Let's just say that the instalelr is a piece of crud that had been
>> kicking
>> around forever. When you install a production grade Solaris with CDROM's
>> it will still load in each CDROM one at a time and then it stupidly asks
>> you what to do with the CDROM that it just re
> On Sat, 13 Jan 2007, noel wrote:
>
>> 1. the command line isn't bash, so I'm kinda stuck about that. can it be
>> switched to bash? or is the solaris command line better than bash...
>
> The default Solaris shell is /bin/sh, which is the original Bourne shell.
> You're free to change your user's
Dennis,
Let's just say that the instalelr is a piece of crud that had been kicking
around forever. When you install a production grade Solaris with CDROM's
it will still load in each CDROM one at a time and then it stupidly asks
you what to do with the CDROM that it just read? Shall I in
> Hi,
>
> I'm giving open solaris a try (installed in vmware), but I'm running into
> some difficulties.
Its not "linux" if probably the first thing that you ran into :-)
I always try to tell people that the command line in Windows XP is not
Linux either but we all seem to expect "ls" to ju
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007, noel wrote:
1. the command line isn't bash, so I'm kinda stuck about that. can it be
switched to bash? or is the solaris command line better than bash...
The default Solaris shell is /bin/sh, which is the original Bourne shell.
You're free to change your user's shell to a
Hi,
I'm giving open solaris a try (installed in vmware), but I'm running into some
difficulties.
1. the command line isn't bash, so I'm kinda stuck about that. can it be
switched to bash? or is the solaris command line better than bash...
2. I've heard zfs is supposed to be great and was hoping
37 matches
Mail list logo
