|
I've never heard of a hardcore Linux guy who ever wanted to make anything easier for the Windows crowd. Remember that Linux has been described as "user-friendly, but it gets to choose its friends".
|
|
|
|
|
The big kids put themselves in the sudoers group. 
Edit: then they type "sudo init 0" (shorter)
If you can keep your head while those about you are losing theirs, perhaps you don't understand the situation.
modified 10-Mar-19 16:41pm.
|
|
|
|
|
theoldfool wrote: Edit: then they type "sudo init 0" (shorter)
No, we login as root and type halt. Dang lusers shouldn't be on my machine, anyway. 
|
|
|
|
|
Seems a bit pointless, to me.
I mean, why on Earth would anyone ever want to shut down a computer?
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Two words: Memory leaks.
The MicroVAX 3600 I managed while in college would crash on Tuesday unless I had rebooted it on Friday.
|
|
|
|
|
Hmm... when I worked at DEC, the uVAX II under my desk ran for months on end without a reboot. And when I did reboot it, it was to install an OS or tool upgrade.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
Indeed. And later I worked with AlphaServer systems that ran for years without even needing to have our product restarted.
I fear the college was running some sub-par third-party software.
|
|
|
|
|
Side tracking a little:
Raymond Chen, in his delightful book "The old new thing" (based on his equally delightful blog of the same name, [^]) he tells about this web server that just had to be available 24/7, but some memory leak made it crash every now and then, every few days. To keep the service running while they debugged the software, they replaced the server with a small cluster and a load balancer: Whenever one of the machines were reaching memory saturation, it was taken out of the cluster and rebooted. In the meantime, the other machine served the users. Later, the other cluster node would be the one to be taken out and rebooted while the first served the customers.
They did find the memory leak, and the installation could go back to single server operation. (There was no need to run a cluster for performance reasons.)
Thumbs up for "The old new thing", both book and blog! The book is fun, but you can actually learn a whole lot from it, especially about legacy and backwards compatibility. (And especially if you just completed your degree and have very limited experience in the commercial world.)
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: I mean, why on Earth would anyone ever want to shut down a computer?
Well, there's that. 
I play a lot with different Linux distributions--way, way more than will work with my Linux VM host's 32GB of RAM.
I have another host with 64GB, but that one's for my Windows VMs only.
|
|
|
|
|
I suspect if you run the UI remotely it will prompt for a password....
|
|
|
|
|
I'll have to try. I tend to run my Linux VMs right from the Hyper-V console when RDPed into the Hyper-V host itself; in that context, VMs (Windows and Linux) tend to see that as local, not remote.
I'll have to try with VNC or some equivalent. I hardly ever take the time to configure my Linux VMs to let me log in that way.
|
|
|
|
|
that's from the console - it's then assumed that it's either a single user machine or locked up in a server room - so that user accessing the command should have a clue or two what they're choosing to do.
running the gui remotely normally* doesn't allow root operations (* - of course there are hoops that if correctly arranged and jumped through that can change)
sudo is only for children and below* (* - people that really should just stay on windows)
|
|
|
|
|
lopati: roaming wrote: sudo is only for children and below* (* - people that really should just stay on windows)
What a mixed message. The Linux graybeards all tell you to always run as a limited user and you're a fool if you ever login as root. Or am I misinterpreting your answer here?
|
|
|
|
|
yeah I'm more old fashioned, just start a [x]term, su, do the job, ^D out.
(how many times are there a few instructions to get done? less work for my old fingers doing sudo ..., sudo ..., sudo ...)
but also occasionally I'm on non-linux machine - sudo doesn't always exist
and probably most likely "muscle memory" effect - more used to that way [without thinking too much].
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: "Linux is better thought-out than Windows"
You should read "the old new thing" a bit.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Isn't that Raymond Cheng's (Chang?) blog? Is he still posting?
I've watched a couple of his "one-minute answer" videos on Channel 9, but I honestly have never taken the time to read his blog.
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: Isn't that Raymond Cheng's (Chang?) blog? Is he still posting?
Yup.
The Old New Thing[^]
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
My UI always prompts me for a password if I try to do "big stuff". The UI is calling the underlying commands. Your behaviour I never saw. My guess is that you have the passwd saved somewhere in the UI.
"If we don't change direction, we'll end up where we're going"
|
|
|
|
|
I want to believe you, but I've used dozens of distributions, and I've never been prompted to enter my password to do a shutdown, except from a command prompt. I've never done nearly enough with Linux to have it save passwords beyond whatever default settings exist.
When installing the OS, I generally add myself as an administrator (that's part of the standard install), and I hardly ever create additional accounts or try to strip down rights from my default account.
|
|
|
|
|
The commandline is available to any process running under any account, and therefore it's wise in that instance to ask for credentials before shutting down (guards against remote shutdown). The UI, on the otherhand requires the user to be sitting there, and shutting down is a deliberate act, thus, no credntials required.
I'm not sure, but requiring credentials before shutting down via the UI might be subject to a a system setting. I don't know for surem, but it's something to investigate if you are so inclined.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
That's an interesting thought. Arguably, I've already provided my credentials when I logged in, but that's the case whether that was through the UI or purely a command line (like SSH). If I've logged in via the UI, then any command prompt window I subsequently open "should" inherently know who I am.
|
|
|
|
|
Every admin-level command issued in a console must request credentials. There are ways around that requirement (google is your friend, and I do it every once in a while when I'm going to issue a series of admin-level commands), but even if you did that, it would still only be applicable to a given session. For every new session, you'd have to do it again.
Once again, it's a security measure that prohibits remote execution.
Security is, indeed, a pain the the ass.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
modified 11-Mar-19 11:46am.
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: Security is, indeed, an pain the the ass.
You know what they say:
Security. Convenience. Pick one.
|
|
|
|
|
Amazing observation; more than an oversight, it's an issue most likely avoided as I'm certain that (OP), myself and many others have seen this and wandered what the deal is. DE and DM software generally run in a SuDo style mode with certain privileges one of which is shutdown & restart among others. One reason (or several actually) that most old hand system administrators prefer to run Linux & BSD systems via the prompt rather than installing anything like a GUI desktop environment --security concerns, stability (some apps may not function correctly without special privileges) and most times GUI clutters their workspace.
Anyway, Linux like any other operating system is subject to developer over sight else we wouldn't need security patches and new kernels. Additionally, Linux is not better thought out than Windows it is implemented in a way that the particular distribution is laid out logically if anything. Windows on the other hand could still benefit from better directory structure and more "in-your-face" security and systems management for those whom not a current copy of the contemporary Windows System Administrator Guide on hand. Neither O.S. is close to perfect and the sooner everyone accepts the fact the sooner things can get rolling again toward better security and stability --right after we get away from Intel's Spectre-Meltdown platform (makes you wander if Intel isn't in anti-virus software investment portfolio somewhere in the shadows, hunh)...
Good article regardless.
I was unaware of that...
|
|
|
|
|
TheRaven wrote: Windows on the other hand could still benefit from better directory structure and more "in-your-face" security
Gawd, more in-your-face than the constant UAC prompts? I thought those were already excessive... 
TheRaven wrote: makes you wander if Intel isn't in anti-virus software investment portfolio somewhere in the shadows,
Did you forget they've purchased McAfee for a few billions a few years back...?
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
