Support NeoGAF

[Vanillalite]

I totally understand ya. I go in cycles. I'll boot into Windows, and then just habitually boot into Windows for a while. Then one day I'll boot back into Ubuntu, and use that for a while. Currently though outside of Zune (which I use for my phone) Linux has gotten to the point for me where I can do everything outside of gaming. So gaming literally is the only block for me being in Ubuntu full time. Even then I can play all of my humble indie bundle games on Linux if I want to.

I'll fully admit though I'm not a big MS Office person in terms of needs so I'm not sure how well that goes over in wine. Quite honestly I might need an office program once a month or so, and I just use either Office Live or GDocs. That goes for when I'm booted into Windows or Linux. I have Libre installed on both, but only use it on the rare occasion I can't do a small thing I might need (like I wanted to page break in excel but couldn't do it on the web version).

As for your .pls file I'll look into it later. Probably a weird bug, but IDK. On a side note the next stable release of Banshee aka version 2.2 is gonna hit before October. If all else maybe that'll fix your issue.

 

[quickwhips]

anyone have a suggestion for a good linux dist for penetration testing. I was looking at backtrack but when i finish the install and try to connect to my test network wireless connection it kills the router. I think it might be a bug or might be a issue with my wireless card? It connects will browse one website and then my ap stops responding.

 

[clav]

anyone have a suggestion for a good linux dist for penetration testing. I was looking at backtrack but when i finish the install and try to connect to my test network wireless connection it kills the router. I think it might be a bug or might be a issue with my wireless card? It connects will browse one website and then my ap stops responding.

I would say wireless card.

What wireless card is it?

If I remember correctly when I used backtrack a few years ago, there were only a handful of cards that supported wireless testing.

Oh also, don't bother with the 64-bit version of backtrack. Stick with 32-bit.

 

[quickwhips]

I would say wireless card.

What wireless card is it?

If I remember correctly when I used backtrack a few years ago, there were only a handful of cards that supported wireless testing.

Oh also, don't bother with the 64-bit version of backtrack. Stick with 32-bit.

intel centrino card i was using 64 bit im going ot try the 32 bit thanks for the suggestion.

 

[itxaka]

intel centrino card i was using 64 bit im going ot try the 32 bit thanks for the suggestion.

check what driver is using just in case with

lsmod|grep iwl


You can use as alternative wifiway



Im so excited! I got an interview tomorrow at Openbravo, producer of a really nice open-source ERP. I hope they get me in so I can fiddle with linux and VMs!

 

[CountAntonius]

anyone know why my resolution keeps resetting to automatic in my x display setting on xubuntu? I already set them to saved to the x configuration file but every time I reboot it's back to the wavy lines.

 

[ayeorkean]

Anyone know how safe a ubuntu webserver is floating around the net?

 

[Vanillalite]

Anyone know how safe a ubuntu webserver is floating around the net?

What do you mean? Just how safe a stock ubuntu server is if your running a website on it? Decently secure so long as you stay up to date I'd assume. Granted the crew on here said you can download iptables which basically is a big netfliter for your system.

NetFilter.Org

You can read through that in terms of knowing that program.

Outside of that a lot IMO would depend on the website. How you coded it OR if you're using a CSM how secure the CSM is and if it's up to date. Stuff like Wordpress makes it stupid easy to update now though.

 

[Vanillalite]

Ubuntu 11.10 Update

Update status on the beta... downloading updates now and noticed I have an fglrx download... new Ati drivers commeth and according to all I read on the forums/irc they fix a ton of issues if shit hasn't been fixed yet. Good news for Ati people like me!

PS: Google-Music-Frame is pimp as funk and has sold me on the idea of Gnome 3.2 having "web apps" as it's 110% a "web app" for Ubuntu.

 

[GameplayWhore]

Anyone know how safe a ubuntu webserver is floating around the net?

*comes back from three weeks in the mountains and deserts of the West Coast -- also San Fran*

It depends on what actually web server you're using with Ubuntu. But, in general, Linux-based web servers have a slightly paranoid, secure-by-default policy.

Most of the security issues you'll come across will involve not the computer being compromised, but your specific website getting itself cracked across time and space. You can't* turn a linux server into a DDoS zombie, but you can take advantage of holes in specific web-based languages and packages to make the administrator's life a living hell. I maintain a server for a local science fiction club (the ones that jumpstarted the I-Con convention out in Long Island, for anyone in the NY area), and the admittedly very whorish Mediawiki setup (the same software powering Wikipedia) gets random electronic cigarette pages created by newly created users that I have to clean up. It used to get astonishing levels of random-character graffiti on arbitrary pages, but thankfully I make people do math in order to post changes, and that seems to have shut up most automated systems.

So you're more or less safe from the onset. If it's your particular curiousity, I recommend getting a program called Nessus. It's a port scanner that gives you detailed information about the computer you're looking at and how it might be compromised. It also has a graphical front end that makes it slightly less unwieldy. If you get more into it, there are programs like chkrootkit that'll specifically hunt for instances of your machine having been actually severely compromised.

This is an interesting list of audit tools. Also, if you end up being very very paranoid about security, look into FreeBSD, which is fairly gui-less but still not too difficult to work with and has an exceptional record with high server uptimes, as well as OpenBSD, which is supernaturally secure but probably harder to work with than the aforementioned programs..

Also install webmin. It's a web-based front end (on its own secure server port) for various servers and other system things including the common web server programs.


...sorry if the above is a bit rambling. I've been hiking all over the west coast for weeks, and my body just flummoxed me with twelve hours of sleep, which has left me a bit delirious. That's what you get for leaving your comfort zone. Still, as they say, Worldcon and Burning Man for the win!

Spoiler

also, I got picked up by an asian airline stewardess with unexpected tattoos of the Empire and Republic logos from Star Wars and by a swiss radio reporter whose next vacation stop is practically in my backyard -- I still don't know how these things ever happen

* it's possible, but it won't happen, especially if your setup differs from other Linux servers in various ways

 

[GameplayWhore]

Archlinux is getting on my nerves a bit. There are a couple things I've had to do to get the system properly working (compositing doesn't work without using the official ATI Catalyst drivers, and my epson printer requires a nonstandard version of CUPS that's in the AUR system), and since they're not in the default repositories, they cause annoying problems whenever I do a system update. Arch practically requires you to do a system update frequently, so I am having to deal with bizarre file conflicts fairly often.

Right now, after trying (and failing) to pacman -Syyu, I am manually upgrading every package. I still like how it gives helpful instructions after installing or upgrading a package instead of trying (and in the case of some distros, failing) to automate everything. But I may move on not too far from now.

Granted, I have no optical disc drive and am lazy about buying one. This distro easily survived a full cpu/motherboard upgrade, which I really appreciated.


But at least it's time to start monitoring distrowatch to see what interesting things are popping up. Maybe I'll finally try Mint Debian or OpenSuSE Tumbleweed.

 

[Vanillalite]

Archlinux is getting on my nerves a bit. There are a couple things I've had to do to get the system properly working (compositing doesn't work without using the official ATI Catalyst drivers, and my epson printer requires a nonstandard version of CUPS that's in the AUR system), and since they're not in the default repositories, they cause annoying problems whenever I do a system update. Arch practically requires you to do a system update frequently, so I am having to deal with bizarre file conflicts fairly often.

Right now, after trying (and failing) to pacman -Syyu, I am manually upgrading every package. I still like how it gives helpful instructions after installing or upgrading a package instead of trying (and in the case of some distros, failing) to automate everything. But I may move on not too far from now.

Granted, I have no optical disc drive and am lazy about buying one. This distro easily survived a full cpu/motherboard upgrade, which I really appreciated.


But at least it's time to start monitoring distrowatch to see what interesting things are popping up. Maybe I'll finally try Mint Debian or OpenSuSE Tumbleweed.

Optical Drives aren't needed anymore. Just make sure you have a flash drive big enough to fit the iso on and you are good to go. There are 2 big programs as well as individual ones from certain distros that'll let you create a bootable flash drive with the iso on it.

If you want something that just works, without the frills, and tries to stay with the FOSS mantra I'd highly recommend the current version of Debian. They are at version 6 entitled "Squeeze" and it gets HIGH marks for what it's trying to be at least.

Also since most distros let you run them as a live distro now you can try out anything you'd like on your usb stick that way. Then you can decide if you want to switch and to what. Just remember live versions are always as speedy as normal versions especially running them off of a usb stick.

 

[MrHicks]

NOOB question

isn't there a way to "OPEN" a closed source software????
can hackers force open source something like the windows kernel?
i mean you've got the software right there...can't you reverse engineer that shit?

how does this work
or is it that closed source cannot be forcefully opened lol?

 

[Schlep]

They can and do reverse engineer software (see Gnash and Moonlight).

The software usually sucks a lot, though (see Gnash and Moonlight).

 

[thcsquad]

NOOB question

isn't there a way to "OPEN" a closed source software????
can hackers force open source something like the windows kernel?
i mean you've got the software right there...can't you reverse engineer that shit?

how does this work
or is it that closed source cannot be forcefully opened lol?

Reverse engineering is way more time-consuming than you think. Any software worth the process at all would take decades to reverse engineer, and nobody wants to do that.

 

[itxaka]

NOOB question

isn't there a way to "OPEN" a closed source software????
can hackers force open source something like the windows kernel?
i mean you've got the software right there...can't you reverse engineer that shit?

how does this work
or is it that closed source cannot be forcefully opened lol?

Nope.

You can reverse engineer closed source programs to know how they work and create an open source version of it. Like SAMBA did at the start.

Of course reverse engineering is forbidden in some places so you gotta be careful with it.

But it has to make sense to reverse engineer something. What would you need an open source version of the windows kernel for? In the case of SAMBA it was done for inter operability between different os.

Normally the only things that need to be reverse engineered are drivers and filesystems. The rest of the software is easier to made it from scratch.

 

[Fireblend]

NOOB question

isn't there a way to "OPEN" a closed source software????
can hackers force open source something like the windows kernel?
i mean you've got the software right there...can't you reverse engineer that shit?

how does this work
or is it that closed source cannot be forcefully opened lol?

The code that is written by humans to create applications, operating systems, and other kinds of software isn't the code that gets distributed and bought by users. After writing your "high-level", somewhat human-readable code, you usually "compile it", which means translating your code into machine language, which is low-level, hard to understand, and doesn't have a line-to-line translation of the original code, this due to optimizations and liberties the compiler takes during compilation, translation of structures that are just abstract constructs for programmers to use more easily, and others. Not to say it can't be read, just that it's extremely difficult and basically a pain. That is the executable that goes into your computer. Try opening a .exe file (or an executable at /usr/bin on Linux) and you'll see it's unintelligible. Download code from the internet (such as software you have to install by using autotools or make) and take a look at the code; it is more readable, and might even contain comments by the programmers, explaining what they're doing where, something that also gets lost through the translation to machine language.

Since reverse engineering means looking at the way the software works and figuring out how it does it (even through a code dump or similar, which, again, would only be machine language and pretty much a pain to read through), it's a very uncertain art in that the result will be entirely different from the original software. A good example was how OpenOffice figured out years ago how to parse and show .doc files, but was still an incomplete and often disappointing implementation.

You can make clones of software (again, such as OpenOffice) and open-source them. Which is the closest you'll get to having a closed-source software open. In addition to that, there's an ideological and legal implication to open-source, so even if you had the code to Windows and even if "hackers" made it available on torrent sites for the world to have, it would be illegal to modify it, distribute it or probably even study it, so any project that took that risk would be subject to a painful Cease and Desist by Microsoft, most likely.

Hope that was a decent enough explanation.

 

[-KRS-]

Archlinux is getting on my nerves a bit. There are a couple things I've had to do to get the system properly working (compositing doesn't work without using the official ATI Catalyst drivers, and my epson printer requires a nonstandard version of CUPS that's in the AUR system), and since they're not in the default repositories, they cause annoying problems whenever I do a system update. Arch practically requires you to do a system update frequently, so I am having to deal with bizarre file conflicts fairly often.

Right now, after trying (and failing) to pacman -Syyu, I am manually upgrading every package. I still like how it gives helpful instructions after installing or upgrading a package instead of trying (and in the case of some distros, failing) to automate everything. But I may move on not too far from now.

Granted, I have no optical disc drive and am lazy about buying one. This distro easily survived a full cpu/motherboard upgrade, which I really appreciated.


But at least it's time to start monitoring distrowatch to see what interesting things are popping up. Maybe I'll finally try Mint Debian or OpenSuSE Tumbleweed.

Am I the only Arch user who has no issues with the package manager or what? I mean I hear this from time to time but I've never had any such issues myself. And I have 172 packages from AUR installed.

The graphics driver issue is an issue with every linux distro. You need the official drivers to get the best performance out of Nvidia and ATI cards. The only difference is that some distros let you do that automatically. And printing has always been a weak aspect of linux. I doubt it will be easier in something like Ubuntu. In fact it would probably be harder unless there is a modified CUPS package for that distro that you can install from the official repositories. Otherwise you're gonna have to do it manually by compiling it yourself or be lucky and find an unofficial repository. With AUR there are at least scripts that does everything for you.

Also, are you using a wrapper for pacman, like yaourt? It lets you search, install and upgrade packages from AUR automatically. And you can also rebuild official packages with it to add your own build flags and whatnot. It's a little slow though, and there are other wrappers now that are probably faster but I'm so used to yaourt now. When I upgrade my system I run "yaourt -Syua" (the -a is for including AUR packages in the upgrade) and it upgrades everything. And you can add --devel to upgrade packages which were built from SVN, CVS etc.

I couldn't imagine using AUR by downloading the scripts manually and running makepkg every time.

 

[Vanillalite]

The 2nd Beta of Gnome 3.2 has been released as 3.1.91....

Gnome 3.2 beta 2 announcement!

 

[Eklesp]

Archlinux is getting on my nerves a bit. There are a couple things I've had to do to get the system properly working (compositing doesn't work without using the official ATI Catalyst drivers, and my epson printer requires a nonstandard version of CUPS that's in the AUR system), and since they're not in the default repositories, they cause annoying problems whenever I do a system update. Arch practically requires you to do a system update frequently, so I am having to deal with bizarre file conflicts fairly often.

Right now, after trying (and failing) to pacman -Syyu, I am manually upgrading every package. I still like how it gives helpful instructions after installing or upgrading a package instead of trying (and in the case of some distros, failing) to automate everything. But I may move on not too far from now.

Granted, I have no optical disc drive and am lazy about buying one. This distro easily survived a full cpu/motherboard upgrade, which I really appreciated.


But at least it's time to start monitoring distrowatch to see what interesting things are popping up. Maybe I'll finally try Mint Debian or OpenSuSE Tumbleweed.

I have not used Arch with an ATI card but I do know that support for ATI video cards in linux is weak anyways. Since Arch is a "rolling release" distro it is likely that sometimes you will end up upgrading a package that has some bugs, I have always been able to find answers in the forum when this happens.

What error message are you getting when trying to upgrade?
pacman -Syu instead of -Syyu

Also, like synt4x said, you can upgrade AUR packages.
yaourt -Syu --aur --devel

 

[GameplayWhore]

I have not used Arch with an ATI card but I do know that support for ATI video cards in linux is weak anyways. Since Arch is a "rolling release" distro it is likely that sometimes you will end up upgrading a package that has some bugs, I have always been able to find answers in the forum when this happens.

Oh, it was complaining about a conflict in "/usr/lib32/dri", so I renamed the directory. This worked after a reboot. I'm going to have to look into which cups package in AUR it was exactly that allowed my printer to work, and then I'll be fairly fine.

Also, like synt4x said, you can upgrade AUR packages.
yaourt -Syu --aur --devel

This is something that escaped my mind. Thank you for the reminder.

 

[cory.]

Installed Natty a few days ago. After installing everything and tweaking compiz a little, it's just fantastic. Seems like Ubuntu is on its way to becoming a free OS X alternative.

 

[Vanillalite]

Installed Natty a few days ago. After installing everything and tweaking compiz a little, it's just fantastic. Seems like Ubuntu is on its way to becoming a free OS X alternative.

What were you running previously if I may ask? Just curious. Were you running OSX before or Windows? Were you already running Ubuntu, and just hadn't upgraded your version in a while? Just wondering here.

 

[cory.]

What were you running previously if I may ask? Just curious. Were you running OSX before or Windows? Were you already running Ubuntu, and just hadn't upgraded your version in a while? Just wondering here.

I'm running a dual-boot setup with Windows 7.
I've used Ubuntu before, but not since they switched the default theme. I tried out Mint in the interim, I liked it better than Ubuntu at the time but I don't think I would go back to it.

 

[Vanillalite]

I'm running a dual-boot setup with Windows 7.
I've used Ubuntu before, but not since they switched the default theme. I tried out Mint in the interim, I liked it better than Ubuntu at the time but I don't think I would go back to it.

Cool. Thanks for the info! Sounds like you probably missed the past 3 or 4 releases then so I could see why it's a big jump. The next version hits in less than a month so you can upgrade to an even better version then as it fixes a lot of the unity usability issues. Though you didn't mention having any Unity problems.

Speaking of which I'll be doing the 11.10 |OT| like always Linux-GAF. If you have any tips, suggestions, inclusions, or just want a shot out let me know. Also if you dislike how I did the last two Ubuntu |OT|s then let me know and I'll try and oblige in terms of changing things up for the better!!

 

[CrudeDiatribe]

Bah, my [work's] Ubuntu web server got hacked last night. Had an email from rkhunter every hour for the past 12 when I got into the office.

Should have spent more time months ago upgrading it to 10.04.2 LTS instead of leaving it at 9.04. Looks like they just installed some IRC robots. I nuked the processes rkhunter identified (perl scripts running as www-data) and the www-data cronjob that I found installed.

Cronjob was to run /var/tmp/.r/update (stdout and stderr redirected to /dev/null) every minute.

That directory wasn't there when I went looking, alas.

I'm just assuming the box is still compromised (it's certainly still vulnerable), despite rkhunter running clean, so I'm building a new server now. 10.04.2 LTS, automatic security updates on.

 

[Vanillalite]

Woah that sucks dude. Any clue how they got in? Do you regularly install the security updates that came down or not? Did you have any kind of firewall and iplogger to maybe see if you could figure out how they got in, and see if maybe you could track the address?

Shit like that would scare the fuck of out me everyday if I was a server admin. I'd be constantly paranoid, and even I'd probably always think my box was clean.

 

[Tworak]

Woah that sucks dude. Any clue how they got in? Do you regularly install the security updates that came down or not? Did you have any kind of firewall and iplogger to maybe see if you could figure out how they got in, and see if maybe you could track the address?

Shit like that would scare the fuck of out me everyday if I was a server admin. I'd be constantly paranoid, and even I'd probably always think my box was clean.

seems 9.04 EOL'd a while ago. I guess that's part of why he got pwnt.

but yeah, more details plx

 

[itxaka]

Bah, my [work's] Ubuntu web server got hacked last night. Had an email from rkhunter every hour for the past 12 when I got into the office.

Should have spent more time months ago upgrading it to 10.04.2 LTS instead of leaving it at 9.04. Looks like they just installed some IRC robots. I nuked the processes rkhunter identified (perl scripts running as www-data) and the www-data cronjob that I found installed.

Cronjob was to run /var/tmp/.r/update (stdout and stderr redirected to /dev/null) every minute.

That directory wasn't there when I went looking, alas.

I'm just assuming the box is still compromised (it's certainly still vulnerable), despite rkhunter running clean, so I'm building a new server now. 10.04.2 LTS, automatic security updates on.

If it was as www-data the most possible culprit was apache or the web pages you were serving.

As far as I know there is no remote exploits for apache 2.2.11.2 and upwards (which comes with ubuntu 9.04 IIRC) so it could be an issue with the web content you are serving, like a remote file inclusion or a sql injection.

Good luck with the new one

 

[Vanillalite]

BTW I'd be one paranoid person if I was a server admin. Heck I'd be hella paranoid thinking everything was screwed even when it was running well! LOL

 

[CrudeDiatribe]

Woah that sucks dude. Any clue how they got in? Do you regularly install the security updates that came down or not? Did you have any kind of firewall and iplogger to maybe see if you could figure out how they got in, and see if maybe you could track the address?

The box is parallel to the office network, rather than inside the network expressly because this happens. The current firewall/router (a Cisco) does DMZs differently than the previous hardware and a transition would have been non-trivial, so I just left the box unprotected rather than change everything around.

I may look into setting up a DMZ now that I have a new box and can transition mostly painlessly.

seems 9.04 EOL'd a while ago. I guess that's part of why he got pwnt

Yeah, I had the 8.04 LTS, but upgraded away from it at some point in the past for some new hotness or mental deficiency. I had intended to dist-upgrade it twice in a row to 10.04 LTS, but I had a bad experience doing a similar procedure on identical hardware (an intranet web server) and put it off and got busy and forgot about it.

More details below.

If it was as www-data the most possible culprit was apache or the web pages you were serving.

As far as I know there is no remote exploits for apache 2.2.11.2 and upwards (which comes with ubuntu 9.04 IIRC) so it could be an issue with the web content you are serving, like a remote file inclusion or a sql injection.

Good luck with the new one

Thanks!

Looks like some people who weren't me were accessing PHPMyAdmin and causing errors around the time of the security breach. Have now put a Directory Allow/Deny directive in the Apache config for it.

I'm pretty paranoid about what my own software does and doesn't do, didn't think that a slightly hidden PMA install would be vulnerable if the non-trivial passwords weren't known.

Stupid stupid stupid. Oh well, one lesson in four years isn't so bad.

 

[Vanillalite]

Well that sucks, but lesson learned I suppose. Really underlines for me that while having an older distro might suck as long as it's the LTS still getting updates that can be a big difference if your updating to something non LTS and don't plan on keeping up the distro upgrades.

Also as n00b I never had heard of rkhunter, but googling and finding the main page that and Lynis done by the same person both seem insanely cool and extremely useful!

PS: I hope you people don't mind me already calling the Ubuntu 11.10 |OT| thread.

 

[Benjamin_MFF]

Silly question: Is there a way to watch netflix in Ubuntu?

 

[cory.]

Silly question: Is there a way to watch netflix in Ubuntu?

Not really, I think it involves Android or Chrome OS emulation.

 

[itxaka]

Well that sucks, but lesson learned I suppose. Really underlines for me that while having an older distro might suck as long as it's the LTS still getting updates that can be a big difference if your updating to something non LTS and don't plan on keeping up the distro upgrades.

Also as n00b I never had heard of rkhunter, but googling and finding the main page that and Lynis done by the same person both seem insanely cool and extremely useful!

PS: I hope you people don't mind me already calling the Ubuntu 11.10 |OT| thread.

If you don't do it, I don't think anyone else will. We are a small group in gaf

BTW, did you set up that linux blog in the end? Shoot me a pm with the address if you did man!

 

[Vagabundo]

I'm not too cure if I'm going to keep with ubuntu if they go with gnome3 and the new shells. I don't like them at all - maybe they hack them into useablity over the next few releases.

What about the rest of you gnome/ubuntu users?

 

[itxaka]

I'm not too cure if I'm going to keep with ubuntu if they go with gnome3 and the new shells. I don't like them at all - maybe they hack them into useablity over the next few releases.

What about the rest of you gnome/ubuntu users?

Im on 11.04 with unity or whatever is called and it's kind of good once you get used to it.

Best thing is, I can launch everything like in windows 7. Press super + start of the name + enter is really fast.

I just hope they change the title bar thingy. Way too many times, having something on top I have closed something else using the close button on the title bar. I still don't know why a not maximized focused app doesn't move the title bar to the top and instead you got the unfocused controls for another window in the bar. That makes no fucking sense at all.

Also, I had to move the sidebar from automatic hiding to fixed, because the hiding implementation is a fucking disaster.

 

[Tworak]

What about the rest of you gnome/ubuntu users?

I have no idea.

I still don't like gnome3, I still don't like unity, KDE is still iffy and xfce is just barely usable. I'm in quite the pickle.

 

[benjipwns]

I use Ubuntu as primary on my laptop (not really worth the booting in and out to game so I just leave my desktop as Windows) and I use that for mostly internet and sometimes Office stuff so I haven't had major issues with Unity but I won't pretend they don't have work to do. I totally wouldn't mind a "small icon" mode though, I don't need icons that big really to pick the apps.

Tried a LiveUSB of 11.10 and don't care for the top icon being what was the permanent button in the corner. Thing has issues to report every three minutes it seems like too.

One thing I don't get about Unity is why doesn't it show the menu bar automatically for the active app? Why do I have to go up to the bar to get the menu to appear?

As for 11.10 why did they ditch restart from the drop down and you have to shutdown to restart?

 

[Vagabundo]

@itxaka, it is nice to know it is useable anyway.

I tried it for a few days when I upgraded, but I found it restricting. I might give it another go when 11.10 comes out, but this will be the first Ubuntu version that is not a sure thing for me. I've about 6 machines with Ubuntu installed on it.

Maybe the gnome community will splinter or they will continue to do bug fixes for gnome2. they should have it as an option, I'm not sure how that would complicate apps though, having both gnomes about. It's all a bit messy.

@Tworak I'm in your boat. I love that gnome2 just gets out of my way. And I abhor KDE. Really really hate it.

 

[itxaka]

@itxaka, it is nice to know it is useable anyway.

I tried it for a few days when I upgraded, but I found it restricting. I might give it another go when 11.10 comes out, but this will be the first Ubuntu version that is not a sure thing for me. I've about 6 machines with Ubuntu installed on it.

Maybe the gnome community will splinter or they will continue to do bug fixes for gnome2. they should have it as an option, I'm not sure how that would complicate apps though, having both gnomes about. It's all a bit messy.

I think there is already a group that said it would manage gnome 2 updates and bugfixes for quite some time, so you will be lucky

Also I guess that the gnome 3 implementation without the shell (gnome fallback or classic) will be the base for compatibility for new apps and such, and as far as I know, it looks and behaves almost identical to gnome 2 but with a better base so...there is that just in case. And it will probably be better than gnome 2.

http://www.webupd8.org/2011/03/classic-gnome-3-beta-2-video-no-shell.html

 

[Vagabundo]

I think there is already a group that said it would manage gnome 2 updates and bugfixes for quite some time, so you will be lucky

Also I guess that the gnome 3 implementation without the shell (gnome fallback or classic) will be the base for compatibility for new apps and such, and as far as I know, it looks and behaves almost identical to gnome 2 but with a better base so...there is that just in case. And it will probably be better than gnome 2.

http://www.webupd8.org/2011/03/classic-gnome-3-beta-2-video-no-shell.html

ahhh that is good news. I'd heard they were taking out gnome 2 from 11.10 and I thought it was shell or nothing. I used to follow Ubuntu blogs quiet closely, but it's gotten to the point that it just works for me so I stopped ...

EDIT: looks great. I'm sure there will be a way to force it as default. It will probably be faster than my current setup.

 

[Vanillalite]

If you don't do it, I don't think anyone else will. We are a small group in gaf

BTW, did you set up that linux blog in the end? Shoot me a pm with the address if you did man!

I have the blog name and stuff saved.... I went cheap and just added another blog to my Tumblr Blog Roll (instead of paying for hosting and doing my WP thing).... I've just been busy for the past few weeks and haven't had time to set it all up. I sort of wanted to do it last weekend, but then my car died on me and I was dealing with that all weekend.

Tis lame.... but oh wells!

 

[Vanillalite]

Beginning Series of Ubuntu Posts on 11.10 Server Features!

Oneiric server, Deploy Server fleets p1

 

[KernelPanic]

Microsoft pushing to block unsigned OS from booting which would make Linux very hard to use:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/09/21/secure_boot_firmware_linux_exclusion_fears/

Computer scientists warn that proposed changes in firmware specifications may make it impossible to run “unauthorised” operating systems such as Linux and FreeBSD on PCs.

Proposed changes to the Unified Extensible Firmware Interface (UEFI) firmware specifications would mean PCs would only boot from a digitally signed image derived from a keychain rooted in keys built into the PC. Microsoft is pushing to make this mandatory in a move that could not be overridden by users and would effectively exclude alternative operating systems, according to Professor Ross Anderson of Cambridge University and other observers.

If the draft for UEFI is adopted without modification, then any system that ships with only OEM and Microsoft keys will not boot a generic copy of Linux. A signed version of Linux would work, but this poses problems,

Hopefully this is changed or outright shot down

 

[angelfly]

Microsoft pushing to block unsigned OS from booting which would make Linux very hard to use:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/09/21/secure_boot_firmware_linux_exclusion_fears/





Hopefully this is changed or outright show down

AMD+their upcoming coreboot support will save us all.

 

[Vanillalite]

AMD+their upcoming coreboot support will save us all.

Never heard of Coreboot, but my quick skimming it seems interesting. More investigation shall be needed later tonight when I get home!

 

[Vanillalite]

Banshee updated to a new stable release 2.2.

Release Notes!

 

[Man]

Oh my. First time using Linux in a couple of years. I am rusty.
Setting up GNU assembler programming (gas) environment and I'm half-way through. Next is the GCC.

Using WMPlayer and Ubuntu 11 on a Win8 machine.

edit: Probably taking the long way around when I think about it. I'm compiling from Source but Ubuntu probably has some nice app-list/installation thing somewhere.

 

[Kevitivity]

Oh my. First time using Linux in a couple of years. I am rusty.
Setting up GNU assembler programming (gas) environment and I'm half-way through. Next is the GCC.

Using WMPlayer and Ubuntu 11 on a Win8 machine.

edit: Probably taking the long way around when I think about it. I'm compiling from Source but Ubuntu probably has some nice app-list/installation thing somewhere.

Not only will compiling from source take more time, but maintaining your machine in the long run (patching bugs and security issues) is going to be a nightmare! Do yourself a favor and learn to use the package management system - it's what made Ubuntu (debian) famous!