-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Linux Distro Noob thread of Linux noobs
- Thread starter Flying_Phoenix
- Start date
The .gnome2 directory doesn't contain Gnome itself, only settings for it for your user. The hope was that there was something wrong with one of the settings and that deleting it would enable you to log in again. Have you tried logging in again and does it still fail in the same way?
The "var" directory doesn't have a dot in front of it and it's not located in your home directory. If you want to reach it, type "cd /var", or "cd /var/log" which is the directory I think you're looking for. I don't know which log file would hold messages regarding failed login attempts though, so I can't help you there.
Also, do be careful to not delete things outside your home directory without being very sure what you're doing.
Sorry, I should have made myself clear.
pmj was right, that's why I wanted to try deleting .gnome2
I thought that there might be some settings in there which is causing your user unable to log in, based on the fact that guess users can still log in to your machine (so, it sounds like a user specific issue.)
But, I would take Massa's sugestion and try looking at .xsession-errors. in your user's directory.
pmj was right, that's why I wanted to try deleting .gnome2
I thought that there might be some settings in there which is causing your user unable to log in, based on the fact that guess users can still log in to your machine (so, it sounds like a user specific issue.)
But, I would take Massa's sugestion and try looking at .xsession-errors. in your user's directory.
Open a terminal and try this:
http://web.mit.edu/6.033/www/assignments/handson-fs.html
starting from Section II
There's probably a better tutorial floating around.
You can'd do V either.
It's an operating system for your computer. What do you normally do when you're at your computer?
I say boot it up, run Firefox (or install Chrome if you're so inclined) and read some NeoGAF.
Linux, like all operating systems, has its own specific strengths and weaknesses. It's incredibly customizable and it's of course free which is why I personally like it so much. On the other hand, it's not always as polished as commercial products, and of course the availability of commercial software is very limited.
How well Linux will work for you depends on what you want to get out of it. And if you don't know yet, you may have to use it for a bit to get a feel for how it works and what it can do. Go in expecting to learn new things though, because it works very differently than you are most likely used to.
GameplayWhore
Member
We can only tell you what we particularly do with it.
At work, some websites are blocked. So I can set any browser to use my home computer as a SOCKS proxy without installing any additional components.
I use pidgin on my home computer for all my IM accounts, and I want to keep all my configuration in the same place, so no matter where I am, I type:
Code:
ssh -X jc@$(homeip) pidginAnd the program appears on that computer, even though it's actually running in the memory of my home computer. I also do this with a tabbed text editor (either kate or medit, they're both pretty similar) that I use to take notes and keep a todo list and record recipes. None of this requires programs that weren't on the machine to start with.
When somebody says "Hey, I heard of this amazing program called handbrake that allows you to rip dvds and stuff!", instead of doing a web search and downloading a file and hoping I can trust that it won't turn my computer into a weird spam zombie, I (on my work computer) run the Software Manager, browse to the program's category, check its box and click "Apply" to have it magically dowload and install from a trusted source, or (on my home computer) type "packer -S handbrake" in a text terminal for the same effect.
I can choose my interface pretty freely. I have one that lets me turn any application into a tabbed interface, because I can group different windows together, and the titlebar becomes a bunch of tabs. I also have that OS X thingy enabled where every app visually appears when I move the mouse to the corner of the screen. And (as I mentioned earlier today) I have the close button on the left side of my titlebar (in Windows 3.x style), because I think the idea of putting a destructive button right next to something like maximize, which makes the window more prominent, is kind of nonsensical.
I never, ever, ever have to worry about my computer getting turned into a virus, for various reasons, but mainly because (A) all incoming network ports other than that highly secure "ssh" thing mentioned above are closed; (B) as a user, I have no rights to install programs (I'd need to enter the root password for that); (C) All programs (as mentioned earlier) are installed from trusted software repositories, so there's no bullshit about sentient asshole code hiding inside emoticon collections; (D) I can't run programs from inside my email or web browser, and that last bit is where most malware has basically emerged from.
If some sort of security hole appears in a library, I can just run a simple command or app to update everything on my system. In something like Windows, programs tend to be statically built, so you can't just update a central library file -- you'd have to somehow update the built-in library for each individual app that uses it, and that depends on each app's developer recompiling their stuff, something not guaranteed to happen.
There are other things, but that's all that comes to mind. Plus, other operating systems have been catching up (Windows now does the "type part of the program name instead of clicking through menus to find the program" thing, for instance), and I'm not sure which of my features are no longer specific to what I'm using.
xsession-errors should be in your home directory
try: less ~/.xsession-errors
to read it. You can the TAB key in terminal to finish commands for you.
So after typing "less ~/.x" the tab key should autocomplete it.
Less is a handy command tool that let's you page through files.
First you should visit this site. http://cli.learncodethehardway.org/book/cli-crash-courseli3.html#x4-3000
That's a cli tutorial on how to use the terminal. It also learns you to use some basic commands that are really handy when using the terminal. The tutorial is made for beginners, so everyone can learn cli with that tutorial.
Hum, that file should always exist. As Diman suggested make sure you're in the right working directory.
When you use "su - username" with the dash you should be in your login directory by default.
In any case, here's a few more things you can try: (again, after logging in a guest section, opening a terminal and switching to your own account with the command above):
This file might exist and be causing you trouble. Unlikely to be the problem but worth a shot.
$ rm ~/.Xauthority
Upgrading your system could help:
$ sudo apt-get update
$ sudo apt-get dist-upgrade
More log files. If you can't find ~/.xsession-errors, these could help:
$ tar -cf /tmp/lightdm-log.tar /var/log/lightdm
(Then upload the /tmp/lightdm-log.tar file with Firefox on the guest account).
Elfforkusu
Member
Can only speak for myself: the reason I use it is because it's faster ("snappier") than Windows, it's ridiculously customizable, and it can do everything I need to do on a computer (which is quite a bit) for free. The summary of those things is that it's just a better OS. There's a learning curve to take advantage of things like customization, and even to find all the software you might want, but I'm going to use Linux almost exclusively for the rest of my life unless a better OSOS is released.
So... Linux
Downside: no games. Well, a few indie games, some stuff via Wine if you're super-determined... but basically no games.
ThatObviousUser
ὠαἴÏÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïαá¿Ï εἶ
So my Linuxistas, I'm thinking about switching to Linode soon for all my hosting and would like opinions on which distro I should use. I know Pctx said Ubuntu was bad, but at this point I would still prefer ease of use (as opposed to Arch, where you have to build it all yourself I think.)
I heard Cent OS was good? What's the pros/cons on that?
I heard Cent OS was good? What's the pros/cons on that?
CentOS is a free version of RHEL. It's one of the most solid Linux distributions around.
I'd recommend either CentOS or Debian stable for a server.
I hate computers sometimes >.<
I did a bios upgrade to a uefi bios, but it doesnt let me boot from cd rom now... and I am using a mac cinema display and for some reason it doesnt render anything in 'dos' and screws up if I try to enter the bois...
One of my main linux problems is that for ATI I can only install the drivers that arent listed 'post release updates' >.< I try the post release one and it always fails... hm...
Also how much 'worse' is something like a wubi installation compared to a proper install?
I did a bios upgrade to a uefi bios, but it doesnt let me boot from cd rom now... and I am using a mac cinema display and for some reason it doesnt render anything in 'dos' and screws up if I try to enter the bois...
One of my main linux problems is that for ATI I can only install the drivers that arent listed 'post release updates' >.< I try the post release one and it always fails... hm...
Also how much 'worse' is something like a wubi installation compared to a proper install?
Yep. This is a solid recommendation. If you want stability with minimum amount of fuss, one of these two right here is what you want.
ThatObviousUser
ὠαἴÏÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïαá¿Ï εἶ
Do they have access to the same repos? Is yum better than apt? Are there any other notable differences?
I ask because Debian seems more popular.
One notable difference is that CentOS uses SELinux by default while Debian doesn't. SELinux can mean more issues/fuss with permissions, but also better security.
And no they don't use the same repos. It's different packages completely, .deb on Debian versus .rpm on CentOS. And they might enable or disable different options while compiling, or use different patches, or install files in different locations etc etc, on the different distros. So they couldn't use the same repos for those reasons as well. They do both have around the same amount of packages though if that's what you meant.
Also whether or not yum is better or apt is better is kinda subjective. It's mostly a personal preference thing for the end-user. They're both good at what they do.
And no they don't use the same repos. It's different packages completely, .deb on Debian versus .rpm on CentOS. And they might enable or disable different options while compiling, or use different patches, or install files in different locations etc etc, on the different distros. So they couldn't use the same repos for those reasons as well. They do both have around the same amount of packages though if that's what you meant.
Also whether or not yum is better or apt is better is kinda subjective. It's mostly a personal preference thing for the end-user. They're both good at what they do.
My Linux knowledge is still small, but I spent a good amount of time at work this past week trying to get a few of our Linux workstations up to snuff to pass security audits and had a question about .rpms since CentOS is being discussed. Is there a way to see if a given .rpm would work on a certain distribution (say RHEL5 or 6 versus CentOS), or are they mostly/entirely compatible across Red Hat or Red Hat-based distros?
The only way I seem to learn on Linux is when shit is broken on something I have to fix; I can't seem to sit down with an installation all my own and just learn what's what for whatever reason.
The only way I seem to learn on Linux is when shit is broken on something I have to fix; I can't seem to sit down with an installation all my own and just learn what's what for whatever reason.
I haven't used CentOS myself but I'd guess that .rpm files for the latest RHEL would work on the latest CentOS release, since to my knowledge CentOS basically just takes the Redhat packages' build-scripts to compile and make a CentOS package out of it. So in theory everything is installed in the same directories on both RHEL and CentOS, and everything uses the same dependencies and such, and should therefore be compatible.
But I wouldn't bet on older versions of Redhat packages working with the newest CentOS because they might have moved things to other directories, or older versions of an application might use different dependencies, or just a different version of a dependency which is not compatible, and whatnot. If I used the latest CentOS release, I would stick to only the packages for the latest RHEL release if I ever needed to do something like that.
But I wouldn't bet on older versions of Redhat packages working with the newest CentOS because they might have moved things to other directories, or older versions of an application might use different dependencies, or just a different version of a dependency which is not compatible, and whatnot. If I used the latest CentOS release, I would stick to only the packages for the latest RHEL release if I ever needed to do something like that.
Are there commands or tools available to breakdown a .rpm package to see what it's doing and where it's placing files? All I learned from this past week is that updating packages when you don't have access to a repository (closed network) is a giant pain in the ass (but it taught me a fair amount all the same).
I'm also enjoying that I can read this thread and understand more of the discussions, little by little.
I'm also enjoying that I can read this thread and understand more of the discussions, little by little.
rpm -U is used for upgrading.
rpm -qlp *should* dump the files in a package.
rpm -qa to find out what is currently installed. | grep [foo] to shorten the list
http://man.cx/rpm
you can use yum localinstall too, if you're struggling with dependency issues. might be an idea to add EPEL and/or (probably or) rpmforge repository to yum as well.
rpm -qlp *should* dump the files in a package.
rpm -qa to find out what is currently installed. | grep [foo] to shorten the list
http://man.cx/rpm
you can use yum localinstall too, if you're struggling with dependency issues. might be an idea to add EPEL and/or (probably or) rpmforge repository to yum as well.
In general it's not a good idea to update packages manually with rpm. Even if you just want to install a local package using "yum localinstall file.rpm" is better, as it deals with dependency resolution and does a few additional checks.
There's no way to tell which system an rpm was built for so you usually trust the source that produced the package to tell you what systems it's meant to be compatible with. You can query information about an rpm file with "rpm -qp file.rpm", followed by the option you want to use. For example, -qpi shows basic package information; -qpl shows the file list, etc. RPM should never install packages with conflicting files or dependency errors.
In your particular case with a closed network I'd recommend setting up a local YUM repository to provide updates to all systems (it could be a mirror of CentOS's official channel). You can then point your other systems to that repository. You could also create an additional repository for your own custom packages to make it easier to keep your systems up to date.
Ah cool, yeah the -l option is something along the lines of what I was asking for. Typed my fair share of rpm -Uvh this week, and -qa was also useful. Also took me a while to figure out how to uninstall packages if there are two packages with the same name, but one is .i386 and one is .x86_64.
By the end of the week we had setup a yum RHEL5 repo for this particular closed network, but for the purposes of the audit it wasn't an option I knew about early on thus all the time consuming manual updates and dependency hair-pulling. I also later was told about how yum install will handle the dependencies for you without a repo setup provided you have the packages available.
Either way, the feedback is appreciated and this thread is a great learning tool even when just lurking through it. I think I'm going to wipe out my not-often used laptop running Win7 and stick a distro on it just for kicks, to help with my outside of work learning as well.
You actually don't build Arch yourself, that's Gentoo. Arch is all binaries.
To read about Cent OS, I would just read Pctx's previous posts about it.
If you just want to see the directory structure of a package you can also just open it up in your archive manager of choice (like file-roller) to see it because I think RPM files are just .tar.bz2 files with a different file extension. It just extracts them to the root directory when you install them. Then you could extract that and run 'ldd' on the binary to see what deps it's linked to. Of course there are better ways to see dependencies with rpm commands, but you COULD do it like that! 
Vanillalite
Ask me about the GAF Notebook
Well with Gentoo you don't have to compile everything either since you can just use a binhost.
Linode is solid. Several friends use it and swear by it. Distro wise, what are we talking here? Headless (GUI-less) web server? I'd go with CentOS for stablity, reliability and compatibility. If you're thinking about whether or not you need CPANEL for your website, don't even think about Debian as the alternatives are just not as good.
Yup. I haven't used a Debian only build for web server but depending on what you're wanting, either is great.
Indeed.
Here is my experience between apt and yum. yum does not break. Let me repeat that. Anytime you upgrade a package, tell yum to go do something, un-install via yum, it just works. Apt on the other hand can get corrupt repos, break mid-download which can cause package (in this case either tasksel or dpkgconfigure? (that's off the top of my head) corruption and wonkiness of which I have not had any of those issues with yum. If you can do anything with apt, you can do anything x 1 Bajillion with yum.
This. And if you don't need SELinux (as IE it is not a requirement) my best advice is to disable it and harden like you normally would a web server. Caused me too many headaches.
...except as I said above, yum is better.
(IMO)I really love CentOS. Aside from some things being in different places, if you know Linux, you learn them quickly enough to tie the logic chain together as to the "why?" RHEL and CentOS organize things that way.
One big difference is RHEL/CentOS refer to programs as their daemon. Instead of Apache2 or MySQL, they are called httpd, mysqld etc. Also--- Not having to sudo is AMAZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZINGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG. One of my co-workers quickly pointed out "Dude... just sudo bash...." of which caused me to do the....
thing.
Anyways, for our web hosting needs at our College, CentOS and eventually RHEL for support for some of our servers will be great.
ThatObviousUser
ὠαἴÏÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïαá¿Ï εἶ
What's CPANEL? And yeah I think it'd be a headless server.
Here is my experience between apt and yum. yum does not break. Let me repeat that. Anytime you upgrade a package, tell yum to go do something, un-install via yum, it just works. Apt on the other hand can get corrupt repos, break mid-download which can cause package (in this case either tasksel or dpkgconfigure? (that's off the top of my head) corruption and wonkiness of which I have not had any of those issues with yum. If you can do anything with apt, you can do anything x 1 Bajillion with yum.
Sweet! Although now I'm reconsidering my choice to switch to Ubuntu from Fedora for my own PC.
(I'd still install Gnome Shell though.)What's CPANEL? And yeah I think it'd be a headless server.
Sweet! Although now I'm reconsidering my choice to switch to Ubuntu from Fedora for my own PC.
Check it out. Basically web server managed with a UI and it is extremely flexible and powerful. http://cpanel.net/
Personally, Ubuntu is great and for a beginner, I see the value. Fedora 17 Desktop though is really smooth and I can't imagine switching to Ubuntu unless it is something software specific that is driving that. Since you're a GNOME 3 fan and that is your biggest utility, I see no reason to switch guts unless it is for aforementioned software requirements.
ThatObviousUser
ὠαἴÏÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïαá¿Ï εἶ
Cool, I'll check it out.
It's just, Steam is coming only to Ubuntu at first, and it has the Software Center... I've run Gnome 3 on top of Ubuntu before and it was nearly impossible to tell the difference from Fedora 17, but I'm not a deep Linux user.
It's just, Steam is coming only to Ubuntu at first, and it has the Software Center... I've run Gnome 3 on top of Ubuntu before and it was nearly impossible to tell the difference from Fedora 17, but I'm not a deep Linux user.
Ahhhh yeah forgot about that. For gaming, that makes sense. I would imagine though that Fedora will get Steam next due to the community. Also, is Steam locked to Ubuntu or is it Debian wide?
ThatObviousUser
ὠαἴÏÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïαá¿Ï εἶ
No clue. I'm sure if it's locked, someone's found a way to unlock it. This is Linux, after all.
No clue. I'm if it's locked, someone's found a way to unlock it. This is Linux, after all.
Well I would not be surprised if it was locked to Ubuntu kernel versions but who knows.
Here is my experience between apt and yum. yum does not break. Let me repeat that. Anytime you upgrade a package, tell yum to go do something, un-install via yum, it just works. Apt on the other hand can get corrupt repos, break mid-download which can cause package (in this case either tasksel or dpkgconfigure? (that's off the top of my head) corruption and wonkiness of which I have not had any of those issues with yum. If you can do anything with apt, you can do anything x 1 Bajillion with yum.
I actually thought of mentioning this about apt when I wrote my post. Especially if you add unofficial repos apt can break really badly if you're unlucky. But I haven't used yum enough to know if it also breaks like this or not, so I didn't want to say one was better or not because of that. But apparently yum just works then?
I actually thought of mentioning this about apt when I wrote my post. Especially if you add unofficial repos apt can break really badly if you're unlucky. But I haven't used yum enough to know if it also breaks like this or not, so I didn't want to say one was better or not because of that. But apparently yum just works then?
YES!! Even 3rd party repos on CentOS work flawlessly and I have not run into the issues I've seen with Apt.
Vanillalite
Ask me about the GAF Notebook
So the Ubuntu devs delayed Wayland yet again saying they need more time shooting for the 13.04 release. I swear this is never going to make it in, and even if it does I'm not convinced all of this extra time spent on getting it working will be worth the effort.
Elfforkusu
Member
They're replacing X.
It will be worth the effort. It's already worth the effort, arguably (since drivers are shifting towards being X-ambivalent)
Vanillalite
Ask me about the GAF Notebook
Most of the shit that needed replacing in X that was from the days of shit being networked and crap have all been rewritten out by now anyways. Plus it's been around so we know it works.
I mean I get the sentiment, but IDK we only have so many "man hours" to get shit done in the open source world and I can't help but think their time might be better spent else where.
I sincerely mean it when I say I hope I'm wrong and just being a pessimist though.
BTW Ubuntu has "Previews" Now...
Vanillalite
Ask me about the GAF Notebook
Same thing I thought. Read the article and was kind of confused to be quite honest. Looked at the pics and said Woah That Looks Super Cool. Then I was like still not sure if I'll use it or what it's even really for functionality wise.
Vanillalite
Ask me about the GAF Notebook
Kernel has had native SSD support for a while. Not sure about "frying" as an issue though.
I think there is a couple of toggles to mount the FS like noatime and such but nothing more than that.
I have an SSD and I haven't touched any options. Last thing I read was that writing 10gbs to an SSD daily with no optimizations (software side) will mean that the SSD will broke in about 8 years, which is ok for me.
GameplayWhore
Member
As long as it doesn't harm the single greatest killer app that Linux gives me -- being able to run individual applications remotely -- I won't have much of a problem with this.
Wayland doesn't support forwarding AFAIK. It'll require a lot more work to accomplish it or I think you can run an X server on top of Wayland to make forwarding possible. I'm not too enthusiastic about Wayland since it's more of a stripped down Xorg-lite.
One of the issues with forwarding X11 sessions is the TCP overhead. If they've found a way to do it better, I'd be interesting in reading about that.
If you mean they=wayland people, I think they blatantly said that they wouldn't be doing anything regarding network transparency (which I imagine forwarding an X session counts as.)
Pretty sure you'd just have to do something else.