Hi,

Though this is not directly related to linux, but would appreciate any
kind of help.

I have a inspiron 510m, which is around 2.5 years old (running fedora
core 2). It was working perfectly fine till now, but today it hanged 3
times and now it not booting up. On pressing power button power,
hard-disk LED comes up along with keyboard LEDs (but without any
activity on LCD screen) and then everything goes off. During this time
processor fan also seem to work. I tried this a number of times and
one time I was able to get into BIOS setup, but while browsing the
setup setting it again hanged. Battery is also fully charged, and I
also tried with and without AC adapter, but that also doesn't work.
What could be the problem, any ideas?

Thanks,
Alwin

On Fri, May  4, 2007 at 14:15 (-0000), Alwin Gupta wrote:

> Hi,

> Though this is not directly related to linux, but would appreciate any
> kind of help.

> I have a inspiron 510m, which is around 2.5 years old (running fedora
> core 2). It was working perfectly fine till now, but today it hanged 3
> times and now it not booting up. On pressing power button power,
> hard-disk LED comes up along with keyboard LEDs (but without any
> activity on LCD screen) and then everything goes off. During this time
> processor fan also seem to work. I tried this a number of times and
> one time I was able to get into BIOS setup, but while browsing the
> setup setting it again hanged. Battery is also fully charged, and I
> also tried with and without AC adapter, but that also doesn't work.
> What could be the problem, any ideas?

Alwin,

as someone else suggested, check your memory (if you can).

Your symptoms sound reminiscent of mine when the mobo in a D600 rolled
over and died... I hope for your sake it is your memory!

				 Jim

Jim, LV Gandhi,

Thanks for your suggestions. After removing and reinstalling reserve
battery and memory, it came up. I downloaded memtest memory testing
utility and it gave no indication of any memory error. I left memtest
running for around 6 hours. My laptop is a bit better now, but hangs
once in around 12 hours or so. Looks like something else other than
memory is going bad..

-Alwin



--- In linux-dell-laptops@yahoogroups.com, Jim Diamond <zsd@...> wrote:
>
> On Fri, May  4, 2007 at 14:15 (-0000), Alwin Gupta wrote:
>
> > Hi,
>
> > Though this is not directly related to linux, but would appreciate any
> > kind of help.
>
> > I have a inspiron 510m, which is around 2.5 years old (running fedora
> > core 2). It was working perfectly fine till now, but today it hanged 3
> > times and now it not booting up. On pressing power button power,
> > hard-disk LED comes up along with keyboard LEDs (but without any
> > activity on LCD screen) and then everything goes off. During this time
> > processor fan also seem to work. I tried this a number of times and
> > one time I was able to get into BIOS setup, but while browsing the
> > setup setting it again hanged. Battery is also fully charged, and I
> > also tried with and without AC adapter, but that also doesn't work.
> > What could be the problem, any ideas?
>
> Alwin,
>
> as someone else suggested, check your memory (if you can).
>
> Your symptoms sound reminiscent of mine when the mobo in a D600 rolled
> over and died... I hope for your sake it is your memory!
>
> 			 Jim
>

the extender http://www.bloak.net/qwxy

Hi All,

I have been using Dell Insipiron 510m since last 2-1/2 year and now
its dead. I am planning to buy another laptop, but this time I am
looking out for HP laptops, specifically HP nc6400 business series
laptops. This series has a pretty cool configuration 1.83GHz core 2
duo processor with 14.1 in wide display of 1440x900 resolution and
other things. Please let me know your feedbacks/comments on HP
laptops, if any, (except that it is a bit overpriced as compared to
Dell) about the product quality + support from HP.

Thanks,
Alwin

PS: For model to model comparison between Dell and HP, please visit
the following links:

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/in/en/sm/WF06b/1090709-1124051-1124051-1124051-12\
434656-12401284-78063277.html

http://www1.ap.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/latit_d630?c=in&cs=\
inbsd1&l=en&s=bsd

Hi All,

I have been using Dell Insipiron 510m since last 2-1/2 year and now
its dead. I am planning to buy another laptop, but this time I am
looking out for HP laptops, specifically HP nc6400 business series
laptops. This series has a pretty cool configuration 1.83GHz core 2
duo processor with 14.1 in wide display of 1440x900 resolution and
other things. Please let me know your feedbacks/comments on HP
laptops, if any, (except that it is a bit overpriced as compared to
Dell) about the product quality + support from HP.

Thanks,
Alwin

PS: For model to model comparison between Dell and HP, please visit
the following links:

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/in/en/sm/WF06b/1090709-1124051-1124051-1124051-12434656-12401284-78063277.html

http://www1.ap.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/latit_d630?c=in&cs=inbsd1&l=en&s=bsd

Has any one heard the date when Dell will start taking orders for
notebooks with preinstalled Ubuntu?

I will be out of the office starting  21/05/2007 and will not return until
29/05/2007.

I will respond to your message as soon as I can. For urgent matters please
contact our service center at 02/717.08.00 or contact@....

Have a nice time !

De Ruyck Jos

Thank you very much for the date.  I have the specs for a notebook and
plan to be on the phone first thing Thursday AM to place my order.
Arthur Raynolds


On Mon, 2007-05-21 at 12:50 -0500, uteck wrote:
> I think the 24th they start, but it will be a limited selection.  I
> get the feeling they may try to kill the program off like they did
> last time by making it hard to find the Linux versions and making then
> more expensive then the MS version.
>
>
>
> On 5/20/07, Arthur <ARdiver@...> wrote:
>         Has any one heard the date when Dell will start taking orders
>         for
>         notebooks with preinstalled Ubuntu?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> no .sig found
> Please restart your browser.
>
>
>

Does Ubuntu have rpm (for managing software installations)?


On 05/21/2007 07:02 PM somebody named Arthur Raynolds wrote:
> Thank you very much for the date.  I have the specs for a notebook and
> plan to be on the phone first thing Thursday AM to place my order.
> Arthur Raynolds
>
>
> On Mon, 2007-05-21 at 12:50 -0500, uteck wrote:
>> I think the 24th they start, but it will be a limited selection.  I
>> get the feeling they may try to kill the program off like they did
>> last time by making it hard to find the Linux versions and making then
>> more expensive then the MS version.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 5/20/07, Arthur <ARdiver@...> wrote:
>>         Has any one heard the date when Dell will start taking orders
>>         for
>>         notebooks with preinstalled Ubuntu?

--
"This world ain't big enough for the both of us,"
said the big noema to the little noema.

ken wrote:
> Does Ubuntu have rpm (for managing software installations)?
>
>

Ken, are you asking whether Ubuntu uses rpm as its primary software
management tool, or whether it's possible to use rpm? Ubuntu being a
Debian relative uses the synaptic package manager. There are tools to
convert a .rpm package to a .deb package so you can use rpm software. I
have used the alien program, which works well. I have some old rpm
software I've been carrying around for years since 1998. When I switched
from Slackware to Ubuntu, I used alien to convert my old xgammon.rpm
package to xgammon.deb, and then installed it. Of course I was using
RedHat when I got the rpm packages, before Fedora of course. I loved
Slackware, but Ubuntu package management is much, much easier to use. I
actually find the debian style a little better than RedHat's. Ubuntu
notifies me when there are updates for programs or the system, and then
lets me update or upgrade right then and there. Good luck. --Douglas
--

******

Douglas S. Oliver

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity,
    and I'm not sure about the former." --Albert Einstein

"....What right do I have to think?" --Ugarte, December 1941

******

On 05/22/2007 02:29 PM somebody named Douglas S. Oliver wrote:
> ken wrote:
>> Does Ubuntu have rpm (for managing software installations)?
>>
>>
>
> Ken, are you asking whether Ubuntu uses rpm as its primary software
> management tool, or whether it's possible to use rpm? Ubuntu being a
> Debian relative uses the synaptic package manager. There are tools to
> convert a .rpm package to a .deb package so you can use rpm software. I
> have used the alien program, which works well. I have some old rpm
> software I've been carrying around for years since 1998. When I switched
> from Slackware to Ubuntu, I used alien to convert my old xgammon.rpm
> package to xgammon.deb, and then installed it. Of course I was using
> RedHat when I got the rpm packages, before Fedora of course. I loved
> Slackware, but Ubuntu package management is much, much easier to use. I
> actually find the debian style a little better than RedHat's. Ubuntu
> notifies me when there are updates for programs or the system, and then
> lets me update or upgrade right then and there. Good luck. --Douglas

Thanks much, Douglas.  It sounds like .deb packages are what I'd have to
use.  I suppose that's okay.  Though I ran a debian system a long time
ago, I've been using redhat and suse much longer.  I guess I could get
used to another package management system if other things about Ubuntu
were compelling enough.

At the moment I'm running suse 9.3 on a Dell Inspiron 600m.  Tricky
hardware things that work fairly well are the wireless (802.11b/g),
sleep, suspend, usb, CD and DVD burning, etc.  Though I've had this
machine for going on three years, there's a lot that I haven't run
through the paces... like the hot swap bay that takes, alternatively,
floppy drive or CD-DVD burner or spare battery.  Also, I've never once
attempted to use the fax/modem, though there's been a time or two when,
if I knew the fax was going to work the first time and without hassling
with it for more than ten minutes, I would have used it.

The big question is, does Ubuntu handle all these hardware things well?
  Will sleep and suspend function out of the box?

Currently when I'm in a cybercafe and want to hook up to their wireless
AP, I have to toy with several CLI tools to get a connection, sometimes
even add in by hand an item into the routing table.  The dumb blonde
next to using Windows hooks up the first time without knowing what she's
doing, while I have to engineer the connection for five or ten minutes
before it's working.

Sometimes the hot swap works fine, sometimes not.  And hald is rather
complex and not sufficiently documented, at least not for me to be able
to figure out how to make it more reliable.  So I end up rebooting
rather than hot swapping.  Yech!

So are these easier on Ubuntu?  Can I pop in a DVD and watch a movie?
Is connecting to a never-seen-before wireless AP fast and easy like
clicking on a menu?

In the beginning I was asking about Ubuntu, but I'll go for any linux
distro that has these hardware issues figured out.

Comments/responses?

Oh, yeah.  One other thing.  I like to compile packages from source code
and have managed to configure my gcc so that the executables are
optimized for my "mobile" processor.  So does the Ubuntu package manager
permit compiling from source?  Is it one step more than just installing
a binary...? or more like five or ten more steps?  How well are mutual
dependencies handled when compiling from source code packages with
Ubuntu?  (The process for doing this using rpm runs from Ugly to
Impossible.)

Thanks for any input.



--
"This world ain't big enough for the both of us,"
said the big noema to the little noema.

ken wrote:
> On 05/22/2007 02:29 PM somebody named Douglas S. Oliver wrote:

> Comments/responses?
>
> Oh, yeah.  One other thing.  I like to compile packages from source code
> and have managed to configure my gcc so that the executables are
> optimized for my "mobile" processor.  So does the Ubuntu package manager
> permit compiling from source?  Is it one step more than just installing
> a binary...? or more like five or ten more steps?  How well are mutual
> dependencies handled when compiling from source code packages with
> Ubuntu?  (The process for doing this using rpm runs from Ugly to
> Impossible.)
>
> Thanks for any input.
>
Wow, Ken. You've asked a lot of questions here. I'm using an i8600. With
Slackware I had to do a lot of gymnastics to get things working, and
some never worked. When I switched to Ubuntu Feisty, I was shocked to
find that everything I needed worked out of the box--wireless, i8k
buttons, audio, etc. I just made a couple of little tweaks, for example
I made a root account so I could su - and not have to sudo for all my
work. Sudo is fine and safer, but if I need to run a number of programs
that need root access, it's easier to simply become root. To do that, I
simply needed to make a root password. I used: sudo passwd and entered
the new password when prompted--really easy. Because I often prefer to
use a text console with my favorite programs, I had to install the
programs that don't typically come with X. For example, vim, joe. As far
as I know, all the usual compiling programs are there by default, and if
not, they're easy to install. It is not easy to boot directly into a
text console. You have to remove the gdm boot script from the rc3 folder
(I'm on a Mac right now and I'm tired, so I'm guessing the specifics
here.) This is actually me being silly now, because I could do
everything from the X window system. I don't personally use suspend, so
I can't comment on that. Everything else has worked though. I used to
love the rpm management system, but since using the debian system in
Ubundu, I've found it smoother to use. I haven't tried it yet, but I
think you can actually use rpm directly in Ubuntu. You wouldn't really
want to though, unless like me you have some favorite apps in rpm
format. Keep in mind that almost all software has gone through debian so
is available in .deb format. Good luck. --Douglas

--

******

Douglas S. Oliver

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity,
    and I'm not sure about the former." --Albert Einstein

"....What right do I have to think?" --Ugarte, December 1941

******

On 05/23/2007 03:36 AM somebody named Douglas S. Oliver wrote:
> ken wrote:
>> On 05/22/2007 02:29 PM somebody named Douglas S. Oliver wrote:
>
>> Comments/responses?
>>
>> Oh, yeah.  One other thing.  I like to compile packages from source code
>> and have managed to configure my gcc so that the executables are
>> optimized for my "mobile" processor.  So does the Ubuntu package manager
>> permit compiling from source?  Is it one step more than just installing
>> a binary...? or more like five or ten more steps?  How well are mutual
>> dependencies handled when compiling from source code packages with
>> Ubuntu?  (The process for doing this using rpm runs from Ugly to
>> Impossible.)
>>
>> Thanks for any input.
>>
> Wow, Ken. You've asked a lot of questions here.

Yeah.  Well, installing Linux on a laptop does involve a lot of issues,
issues which, I've found, are different from one distro to another.
Installing Linux for a server, on the other hand, isn't a big deal
anymore and can be done in basically fifteen minutes.  When dealing with
so many hardware items, an install can bring up a lot of problems
(again, depending upon the distro).  I'm hoping that by picking the
right distro, I can save myself a few days of wrestling with the install.


> I'm using an i8600. With Slackware I had to do a lot of gymnastics to
> get things working, and some never worked. When I switched to Ubuntu
> Feisty, I was shocked to find that everything I needed worked out of
> the box--wireless, i8k buttons, audio, etc.

That's good news.  I forgot to mention audio, I guess because suse
handled that okay for me.  I did have to use gnome to configure the
audio buttons though... and the suspend trigger.


> I just made a couple of little tweaks, for example I made a root
> account so I could su - and not have to sudo for all my work. Sudo is
> fine and safer, but if I need to run a number of programs that need
> root access, it's easier to simply become root. To do that, I simply
> needed to make a root password. I used: sudo passwd and entered the
> new password when prompted--really easy.

Every linux distro I've ever installed (dozens... going back to kernel
v.0.9.13) always required creating a root password as part of the
initial install of the system.  (?)


> Because I often prefer to use a text console with my favorite
> programs, I had to install the programs that don't typically come
> with X. For example, vim, joe. As far as I know, all the usual
> compiling programs are there by default, and if not, they're easy to
> install. It is not easy to boot directly into a text console.

Do you mean boot up *not* into the GUI...?  so that you have just a
black and white screen with a CLI prompt?



> You have to remove the gdm boot script from the rc3 folder (I'm on a
> Mac right now and I'm tired, so I'm guessing the specifics here.)
> This is actually me being silly now, because I could do everything
> from the X window system. I don't personally use suspend, so I can't
> comment on that.

I love being able to suspend.  I can stop in the middle of, say, writing
an email, in the middle of typing a word-- at the same time in the
middle of creating a graphic in the gimp-- at the same time in the
middle of typing a bash command in a terminal window-- and just shut the
lid.  Then I can take the laptop to a cybercafe, open the lid, jigger
with the wireless/networking to get an internet connection, and continue
working on everything just like I was back at home.  When I'm done at
the cybercafe, again in the middle of a half dozen tasks, I can close
the lid, go back home, and continue with everything right where I left
off before closing the lid.  This laptop has had uptimes of 44 days
(without a shutdown or reboot) and this could have been longer if I
would have specifically worked at it.


> Everything else has worked though. I used to love the rpm management
> system, but since using the debian system in Ubundu, I've found it
> smoother to use. I haven't tried it yet, but I think you can actually
> use rpm directly in Ubuntu. You wouldn't really want to though,
> unless like me you have some favorite apps in rpm format. Keep in
> mind that almost all software has gone through debian so is available
> in .deb format. Good luck. --Douglas

Has anyone here ever created a debian package.  I looked into making rpm
packages, but after reading a lot of documentation, I didn't know any
better how to do it than when I started.  Supposedly there's some "easy"
front end for creating rpm packages.  I don't know that there's a
connection, but since hearing about this front end I've encountered suse
RPMs which errored out and would not install due to errors in the RPM
package itself (something about a "missing description field").  So if
creating a .deb package is straightforward, that would be a plus also.
So anyone here ever create a .deb package?


tnx++,
ken

--
"This world ain't big enough for the both of us,"
said the big noema to the little noema.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

ken wrote:

  >
>> I just made a couple of little tweaks, for example I made a root
>> account so I could su - and not have to sudo for all my work. Sudo is
>> fine and safer, but if I need to run a number of programs that need
>> root access, it's easier to simply become root. To do that, I simply
>> needed to make a root password. I used: sudo passwd and entered the
>> new password when prompted--really easy.
>
> Every linux distro I've ever installed (dozens... going back to kernel
> v.0.9.13) always required creating a root password as part of the
> initial install of the system.  (?)

Well this is one of the interesting surprises with Ubuntu. At set up and
install, you're only asked for a personal password--NOT root. That's why
everything has to be done via sudo. It took me a second to realize what
I needed to do. Once I set up a true root password, I was all set to go.
>
>> Because I often prefer to use a text console with my favorite
>> programs, I had to install the programs that don't typically come
>> with X. For example, vim, joe. As far as I know, all the usual
>> compiling programs are there by default, and if not, they're easy to
>> install. It is not easy to boot directly into a text console.
>
> Do you mean boot up *not* into the GUI...?  so that you have just a
> black and white screen with a CLI prompt?

Yup.

>> You have to remove the gdm boot script from the rc3 folder (I'm on a

That's remove the /etc/rc3.d/S13gdm soft linked file. Ubuntu basically
copies or links all the rcX.d files to the same place. This means that
if you want to force a cli or tui, you need to telinit 1. Of course, if
I'm correct, you then do not have the multi user protections present in
run level 3. Stopping the gui from loading makes it kind of like RedHat
run level 3, which is how I first learned to use Linux in 1998. I first
started using computers in 1976 pre dos days, so I don't shy away from a
B/W terminal.

Take care, Douglas


- --

******

Douglas S. Oliver

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity,
   and I'm not sure about the former." --Albert Einstein

"....What right do I have to think?" --Ugarte, December 1941

******
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGVH8jGtLw/+nYp8ERAnF5AKCd78MrEvTy799lIG6RL0suPIxGDQCfZfZA
xo/D1A0RtJPpsxPxSCoteZY=
=G8qw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On 05/23/2007 01:51 PM somebody named Douglas S. Oliver wrote:
> ken wrote:
>
>
>>> I just made a couple of little tweaks, for example I made a root
>>> account so I could su - and not have to sudo for all my work. Sudo is
>>> fine and safer, but if I need to run a number of programs that need
>>> root access, it's easier to simply become root. To do that, I simply
>>> needed to make a root password. I used: sudo passwd and entered the
>>> new password when prompted--really easy.

Given the below, this is a good thing to know about Ubuntu.  I too spend
  quite a bit of time as root, so much so that I perpetually have a
terminal window logged into root so I can jump to it, run a few or a few
dozen commands, and then get back to what I was doing previously.  I
couldn't see having to type a passphrase that often and would think that
it could actually be *less* secure in some circumstances.


>> Every linux distro I've ever installed (dozens... going back to kernel
>> v.0.9.13) always required creating a root password as part of the
>> initial install of the system.  (?)
>
> Well this is one of the interesting surprises with Ubuntu. At set up and
> install, you're only asked for a personal password--NOT root. That's why
> everything has to be done via sudo. It took me a second to realize what
> I needed to do. Once I set up a true root password, I was all set to go.

If I go with Ubuntu, I'll be doing the same


>>> Because I often prefer to use a text console with my favorite
>>> programs, I had to install the programs that don't typically come
>>> with X. For example, vim, joe. As far as I know, all the usual
>>> compiling programs are there by default, and if not, they're easy to
>>> install. It is not easy to boot directly into a text console.
>> Do you mean boot up *not* into the GUI...?  so that you have just a
>> black and white screen with a CLI prompt?
>
> Yup.
>
>>> You have to remove the gdm boot script from the rc3 folder (I'm on a
>
> That's remove the /etc/rc3.d/S13gdm soft linked file. Ubuntu basically
> copies or links all the rcX.d files to the same place. This means that
> if you want to force a cli or tui, you need to telinit 1. Of course, if
> I'm correct, you then do not have the multi user protections present in
> run level 3. Stopping the gui from loading makes it kind of like RedHat
> run level 3, which is how I first learned to use Linux in 1998. I first
> started using computers in 1976 pre dos days, so I don't shy away from a
> B/W terminal.

The standard way to do this has always been to edit /etc/inittab,
changing the line

id:5:initdefault:

to

id:3:initdefault:

(changing the runlevel from "5" to "3").

Does Ubuntu deviate from this tradition/standard also?


>
> Take care, Douglas

Good talking with you,
ken



--
"This world ain't big enough for the both of us,"
said the big noema to the little noema.

Not a linux question, but what docking station (not port replicator)
do you recommend for an Inspiron E1505?

Needs video, keyboard, mouse, printer ports plus at least 3 USB 2.0 ports.

Thanks.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

ken wrote:
> On 05/23/2007 01:51 PM somebody named Douglas S. Oliver wrote:
>> ken wrote:
>>>> B/W terminal.
>
> The standard way to do this has always been to edit /etc/inittab,
> changing the line
>
> id:5:initdefault:
>
> to
>
> id:3:initdefault:
>
> (changing the runlevel from "5" to "3").
>
> Does Ubuntu deviate from this tradition/standard also?

The answer is a simple yes. This is what I was trying to say, though
clumsily, when I said that everything except run level one is linked to
run level four or five. For example, if you telinit to run level 3, you
wind up back at the initial gui log in screen. The same is true if you
use <ctrl><alt><backspace>, which would normally kill your gui session
and drop you at a text terminal. You might be met with an admonishment
that "only root can to that." Ubuntu is really set up for folks used to
MS Windows. New linux users should normally stay away from acting as the
root user. There's simply too much power there; however, for an
experienced linux user, being forced to stay away from becoming root, is
an annoyance. And I should say that my Ubuntu 7.04 has no inittab file.
I think an earlier version did have that file, and I tried changing the
initdefault which because of the soft linking business, had no effect. I
think a while back I tried teliniting to run level one and then using
startx to get an X session. From there I could use
<ctrl><alt><backspace> to pop out of the gui to the terminal. Silly way
to do this. That's when I learned from a web search about the disabling
the gdm in rc3.d. Anyway, it's been fun to play with this newcomer on
the block. Talk to you later--Douglas


- --

******

Douglas S. Oliver

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity,
   and I'm not sure about the former." --Albert Einstein

"....What right do I have to think?" --Ugarte, December 1941

******
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGVbSaGtLw/+nYp8ERAkZQAKCa3SUdh71TeF0irr35iUIEYTbiqACeIGMQ
V0dOgwupawYwuGwDcfL0hQs=
=IuRm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On 05/24/2007 11:51 AM somebody named Douglas S. Oliver wrote:
> ken wrote:
>> On 05/23/2007 01:51 PM somebody named Douglas S. Oliver wrote:
>>> ken wrote:
>>>>> B/W terminal.
>> The standard way to do this has always been to edit /etc/inittab,
>> changing the line
>
>> id:5:initdefault:
>
>> to
>
>> id:3:initdefault:
>
>> (changing the runlevel from "5" to "3").
>
>> Does Ubuntu deviate from this tradition/standard also?
>
> The answer is a simple yes. This is what I was trying to say, though
> clumsily, when I said that everything except run level one is linked to
> run level four or five. For example, if you telinit to run level 3, you
> wind up back at the initial gui log in screen. The same is true if you
> use <ctrl><alt><backspace>, which would normally kill your gui session
> and drop you at a text terminal. You might be met with an admonishment
> that "only root can to that." Ubuntu is really set up for folks used to
> MS Windows. New linux users should normally stay away from acting as the
> root user. There's simply too much power there; however, for an
> experienced linux user, being forced to stay away from becoming root, is
> an annoyance. And I should say that my Ubuntu 7.04 has no inittab file.
> I think an earlier version did have that file, and I tried changing the
> initdefault which because of the soft linking business, had no effect. I
> think a while back I tried teliniting to run level one and then using
> startx to get an X session. From there I could use
> <ctrl><alt><backspace> to pop out of the gui to the terminal. Silly way
> to do this. That's when I learned from a web search about the disabling
> the gdm in rc3.d. Anyway, it's been fun to play with this newcomer on
> the block. Talk to you later--Douglas

Wow!  Thanks for the explanation.  Ubuntu's too weird for me, too far
off from unix.  The search goes on.

--
"This world ain't big enough for the both of us,"
said the big noema to the little noema.

Apparently I have way less experience with Linux and even computers
than you guys, but I easily solved the problems you are discussing on
my Inspiron 1100 (Xubuntu Feisty) by creating a shortcut to a root
terminal in X, thereby alleviating the need to 'sudo'.  It's usually
one of the first things I start when I fire it up, cuz I like to play
around way more than is necessary to get work done.:)  For example, I
go there and use aptitude to update or install software.

I also made a shortcut to open Nautilus as root, so I can go poking
around in places I shouldn't be allowed, and found a way to insert a
context menu item "Open as Root".  Needless to say, I don't remember
how I did these things, but they are beneficial.

SK

--- In linux-dell-laptops@yahoogroups.com, ken <gebser@...> wrote:
>
> On 05/23/2007 01:51 PM somebody named Douglas S. Oliver wrote:
> > ken wrote:
> >
> >
> >>> I just made a couple of little tweaks, for example I made a root
> >>> account so I could su - and not have to sudo for all my work.
Sudo is
> >>> fine and safer, but if I need to run a number of programs that
need
> >>> root access, it's easier to simply become root. To do that, I
simply
> >>> needed to make a root password. I used: sudo passwd and entered
the
> >>> new password when prompted--really easy.
>
> Given the below, this is a good thing to know about Ubuntu.  I too
spend
>  quite a bit of time as root, so much so that I perpetually have a
> terminal window logged into root so I can jump to it, run a few or
a few
> dozen commands, and then get back to what I was doing previously.  I
> couldn't see having to type a passphrase that often and would think
that
> it could actually be *less* secure in some circumstances.
>
>
> >> Every linux distro I've ever installed (dozens... going back to
kernel
> >> v.0.9.13) always required creating a root password as part of the
> >> initial install of the system.  (?)
> >
> > Well this is one of the interesting surprises with Ubuntu. At set
up and
> > install, you're only asked for a personal password--NOT root.
That's why
> > everything has to be done via sudo. It took me a second to
realize what
> > I needed to do. Once I set up a true root password, I was all set
to go.
>
> If I go with Ubuntu, I'll be doing the same
>
>
> >>> Because I often prefer to use a text console with my favorite
> >>> programs, I had to install the programs that don't typically
come
> >>> with X. For example, vim, joe. As far as I know, all the usual
> >>> compiling programs are there by default, and if not, they're
easy to
> >>> install. It is not easy to boot directly into a text console.
> >> Do you mean boot up *not* into the GUI...?  so that you have
just a
> >> black and white screen with a CLI prompt?
> >
> > Yup.
> >
> >>> You have to remove the gdm boot script from the rc3 folder (I'm
on a
> >
> > That's remove the /etc/rc3.d/S13gdm soft linked file. Ubuntu
basically
> > copies or links all the rcX.d files to the same place. This means
that
> > if you want to force a cli or tui, you need to telinit 1. Of
course, if
> > I'm correct, you then do not have the multi user protections
present in
> > run level 3. Stopping the gui from loading makes it kind of like
RedHat
> > run level 3, which is how I first learned to use Linux in 1998. I
first
> > started using computers in 1976 pre dos days, so I don't shy away
from a
> > B/W terminal.
>
> The standard way to do this has always been to edit /etc/inittab,
> changing the line
>
> id:5:initdefault:
>
> to
>
> id:3:initdefault:
>
> (changing the runlevel from "5" to "3").
>
> Does Ubuntu deviate from this tradition/standard also?
>
>
> >
> > Take care, Douglas
>
> Good talking with you,
> ken
>
>
>
> --
> "This world ain't big enough for the both of us,"
> said the big noema to the little noema.
>

Sword King wrote:
> Apparently I have way less experience with Linux and even computers
> than you guys, but I easily solved the problems you are discussing on
> my Inspiron 1100 (Xubuntu Feisty) by creating a shortcut to a root
> terminal in X, thereby alleviating the need to 'sudo'.  It's usually
> one of the first things I start when I fire it up, cuz I like to play
> around way more than is necessary to get work done.:)  For example, I
> go there and use aptitude to update or install software.
>
> I also made a shortcut to open Nautilus as root, so I can go poking
> around in places I shouldn't be allowed, and found a way to insert a
> context menu item "Open as Root".  Needless to say, I don't remember
> how I did these things, but they are beneficial.
>
> SK
>

Actually, what you have done is not really related to what I was
discussing. Also, Xubuntu is a bit of a different beast. In straight
Ubuntu, one doesn't really need to become root to install and modify
programs. In fact for lack of a root password, there is no true
linux/unix root account. Instead the users are added to the sudoers
account/group. Sudoers are given root privileges through their own login
password. What do I mean when I say there is no true root account? It's
not possible to login as root out of the box. That's because that would
require a root password. What you have done, SK, is cool, but at some
point you had to give a password. I'm guessing you used your login
password, not a root password. For me now, with a root password, I open
an xterm and switch to root with the "su -" command and give the root
password. Su means switch user, and the dash means switch to that
account. You'll notice that your account is located at /home/<your
username>/, whereas, the root account is located at /root/. The
difference is this, if I simply type su and the root password, I remain
in whatever folder I was in when I entered the su command. I also don't
inherit root's settings for the display and such. The dash says to
switch user and inherit that user's settings. This is a subtle but
important difference.

One of the main issues I was discussing related to working without X,
i.e, no gui. I think that everything you've done here SK still remains
within X. Ubuntu normally only allows you to work in either traditional
linux/unix run level 1--single user mode, or traditional level
4--multiuser graphical mode. Level 1 is a single user text console mode,
but not the traditional multiuser text mode of run level 3. SK, type
this: telinit 1 <enter> to see what run level one is like. To return to
the gui, simply type telinit 4 <enter>. Keep hacking, and please share
with us how you did your cool shortcuts. --D

--

******

Douglas S. Oliver

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity,
    and I'm not sure about the former." --Albert Einstein

"....What right do I have to think?" --Ugarte, December 1941

******

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


I hate to add to an already long thread, but ...

Just because the root account is not given a password during the
installation process, doesn't mean it does not exist.  The root
account has simply been "locked", and most certainly does exist.
(check out "man passwd" for the "-l" option).

"sudo -i" and "sudo -s" are two very easy ways to run any
prolonged root shell without enabling the root account, exposing
it to local and remote dictionary or brute force password
attacks.  That is unless of course a sudoer user doesn't have a
weak password.  :-P  But that's another topic.  (the -i will drop
you to the /root/ directory, and -s will leave you in your own
/home/user/ directory.  See "man sudo".)

Elevating user privileges on a need-only basis is considered an
industry wide best practice and is generally accepted by most
experienced administrators.

Changing to runlevel 1 (single user mode) just to gain a root
shell is NOT what one should do if they simply wish to gain root
access.  Runlevel 1 actually stops many services according to
their init level configurations, and is typically used when
performing maintenance, troubleshooting, or system recovery.


As for the default runlevels, Ubuntu moved to "Upstart" which
doesn't use /etc/inittab, but still evaluates it if you create
one.  (see /etc/event.d/)  If one wishes to not use the graphical
logon manager "GDM", they can simply

a) remove the symlinks in /etc/rcX.d
(sudo update-rc.d -f gdm remove)

b) remove gdm altogether (sudo apt-get remove gdm).  This of
course is a dependency of the ubuntu-desktop meta-package,but if
you are already comfortable with using a console only, who
cares.

c) or even remove just one of the gdm rcX.d scripts, and
designate that runlevel of your choice as being a non-graphical
multiuser.  To be thorough, you can add a corresponding "K13gdm"
symlink, so that switching back and forth between this runlevel
will stop gdm accordingly.
i.e.
cd /etc/rc2.d
sudo rm S13gdm
sudo ln -s ../init.d/gdm K13gdm

For regular use of the console, you may also want change your
frame buffer size to a higher resolution to 1024x768 or higher by
editing /boot/grub/menu.lst.
i.e. add "vga=791" to the defoptions variable:
# defoptions=quiet splash vga=791


Anyway, hope this is useful for you folks.

GM
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iQEVAwUBRldCqZmBPgq+AK/PAQKgPQgAinYCHTkYfaSocJpFLeOxqC7Voz0p9cwc
w131d3+uWciDoUrj2AG4jlUMJQalK5y4iAzzru35aomg0I+GUWIUcSAHw8gAyjZr
MkDFTxyyXkbhybnJPeu8D0mtN7RA0e97JtUKqYhzY8vYy5j7n0TK42QpvPZvMUV/
zqlH9d9W/SAQZXpwKN7A8aF2YJsqkNjWfW3ozyQk/lTc1DfBpfyLSByv0VkTmqAr
ygmuPkur5Vr7VqMAbumoZhOpBbuVzPIiwAoKuVAAdAM7/uxTS3sR1gCyYDXX173J
0DFxcKfLfl7IbbnuCIKzf2Xk962lW6LbjQAjTnJ9XW9s0SCeC3aufQ==
=y0Xu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




________________________________________________________________________________\
____Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo!
FareChase.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Gilbert Mendoza wrote:
>
> I hate to add to an already long thread, but ...
>
> Just because the root account is not given a password during the
> installation process, doesn't mean it does not exist.  The root
> account has simply been "locked", and most certainly does exist.
> (check out "man passwd" for the "-l" option).
>

Thanks much, Gilbert. This is really useful information. Am I right in
thinking that sudo -i and sudo -s are a little like the difference
between having a root password and using "su <enter> and <password
enter>" and "su - <enter> and <password enter>? The difference here
being the added safety of using sudo and staying out of the root
account. I've been using linux for almost 10 years but am a relative new
comer to sudo. A few years ago I was studying for my RHSE cert. At that
time we were warned to watch out for users using sudo when they had weak
passwords, as you have said. That's why I stayed away from it till now
with Ubuntu. Not because of a weak password, but because it was easy to
use su when and only when I needed to become root. I made an rm error as
root once on my system. Trashed everything! I just needed to do that
once to become respectful of becoming root. Thanks again--Douglas

- --

******

Douglas S. Oliver

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity,
   and I'm not sure about the former." --Albert Einstein

"....What right do I have to think?" --Ugarte, December 1941

******
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGV1qvGtLw/+nYp8ERAvceAKCEYa2UdCxJRnQeD+OtisJDL5A9pgCggKcm
uJQC0BLb0Ycqf3xs+pAoDIc=
=ZfM+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


No problem at all.

You are correct regarding similarities between "su", "su -",
sudo -i and -s.

"su -" and "sudo -i" elevate privileges to root and use the shell
environment for the root user in /etc/passwd.  you will notice by
issuing a 'pwd' command, you are placed in the /root directory.

"su" and "sudo -s" elevate privileges to root and use the shell
environment of the user running the command.  So, you will stay
in /home/user, and any bash aliases, etc, will remain intact.

There are many advantages in using sudo vs. su, but primarily it
comes down to the granularity of control one has in limiting what
sudoer's can do with their privileges.  For instance, with sudo
you can allow a user (or group of users) to to run a small set of
commands with root privileges, without granting access to more
sensitive functions.

Have a great weekend...

GM

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGV3b2BZd5UQddvKkRAmwZAJ44mKr8x1z69RrZjBMjGrYtkLGIpACgu0hz
No4m+xJgGwBjUrKvDA+oc30=
=dzqI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



--- "Douglas S. Oliver" <dsoliver@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks much, Gilbert. This is really useful information. Am I right in
> thinking that sudo -i and sudo -s are a little like the difference
> between having a root password and using "su <enter> and <password
> enter>" and "su - <enter> and <password enter>? The difference here
> being the added safety of using sudo and staying out of the root
> account. I've been using linux for almost 10 years but am a relative new
> comer to sudo. A few years ago I was studying for my RHSE cert. At that
> time we were warned to watch out for users using sudo when they had weak
> passwords, as you have said. That's why I stayed away from it till now
> with Ubuntu. Not because of a weak password, but because it was easy to
> use su when and only when I needed to become root. I made an rm error as
> root once on my system. Trashed everything! I just needed to do that
> once to become respectful of becoming root. Thanks again--Douglas
>




________________________________________________________________________________\
____
Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection.
Try the free Yahoo! Mail Beta.
http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/features_spam.html