Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-kde (249 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
Re: [suse-kde] Latest KDE disables graphical login as root?
- From: Shriramana Sharma <samjnaa@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 21:05:49 +0530
- Message-id: <42FB7055.8040802@xxxxxxxxx>
Paul Foerster wrote:
Well, seeing as we can't search the archives of this mailing list, you can't expect us to know what questions have been asked and what not. It's not like forums.mozillazine.org or linuxforums.org, where we *can* search and it would be at least partially our fault if we ask a question already asked before.
And hey, if you don't think answering a question repeatedly is not fun (which I fully agree with) I feel you need not get angry over it - just ignore such a question, and maybe someone else will answer the poor ignorant (like me) guy's request.
Well, your mail asking me why I would want to do "such a stupid thing" came *before* all those mails which nicely explained why such a thing is a bad thing to do. Here - I dug these timestamps out of my local archives:
Your post saying "Why do you want to do something that stupid, and then maybe I'll tell you?!" reads 10-Aug-2005 22:16 UTC+0530. Alain Black's post saying "Wow Fred, calm down. There's no need for insulting people here." reads same day 22:23.
The first *concrete* explanation of why it's a bad idea to login to X11 as root came from Daniel Eckl at 23:55 the same day. Till then I had only messages from various people saying "it's bad for security". I wanted to know *why* it was bad for security. Was that such a big mistake?
So you see it's not true that "it was explained to you multiple times but if you insist". Nothing was *explained*. Something was stated - that it's a security risk. I wanted more details as to why it is a security risk. That doesn't classify under:
and hence doesn't justify:
I feel my question as to why exactly it was a security risk was very clearly stemmed from a desire to learn or know something substantial. You say: "do not overdose on medicines". A guy asks "why?" You say "'cause it's a bad idea". He asks "why is it a bad idea?" That's NOT a stupid question.
My friend, I am an academic - I know when I say: "dilution of concentrated sulphuric acid must be done by pouring it into water, and not water into it" and a student asks a question "why is that so", he thinks, and when a student simply accepts that declaration, he doesn't have the desire or energy to investigate the rationale behind my statement. Hence, I request you - please do not irritate yourself if somebody asks a question the answer to which is obvious to you.
Nothing personal against you. Be well.
--
Shriramana Sharma
http://samvit.org
minutes, especially if Linux is concerned. I understand that asking a question is faster to do but please also consider that answering the same questions over and over again is not exactly fun.
Well, seeing as we can't search the archives of this mailing list, you can't expect us to know what questions have been asked and what not. It's not like forums.mozillazine.org or linuxforums.org, where we *can* search and it would be at least partially our fault if we ask a question already asked before.
And hey, if you don't think answering a question repeatedly is not fun (which I fully agree with) I feel you need not get angry over it - just ignore such a question, and maybe someone else will answer the poor ignorant (like me) guy's request.
Another thing is that it was explained to you multiple times but if you insist on i-wanna-be-gui-root then it has to be explained, well, a little more explicitely.
Well, your mail asking me why I would want to do "such a stupid thing" came *before* all those mails which nicely explained why such a thing is a bad thing to do. Here - I dug these timestamps out of my local archives:
Your post saying "Why do you want to do something that stupid, and then maybe I'll tell you?!" reads 10-Aug-2005 22:16 UTC+0530. Alain Black's post saying "Wow Fred, calm down. There's no need for insulting people here." reads same day 22:23.
The first *concrete* explanation of why it's a bad idea to login to X11 as root came from Daniel Eckl at 23:55 the same day. Till then I had only messages from various people saying "it's bad for security". I wanted to know *why* it was bad for security. Was that such a big mistake?
So you see it's not true that "it was explained to you multiple times but if you insist". Nothing was *explained*. Something was stated - that it's a security risk. I wanted more details as to why it is a security risk. That doesn't classify under:
THIS is why techies usually get upset if someone repeats the question over and over just rephrasing it.
and hence doesn't justify:
The techies' impression ... that the person asking does NOT actually want to
learn or know something substantial but rather wants something done for him.
I feel my question as to why exactly it was a security risk was very clearly stemmed from a desire to learn or know something substantial. You say: "do not overdose on medicines". A guy asks "why?" You say "'cause it's a bad idea". He asks "why is it a bad idea?" That's NOT a stupid question.
My friend, I am an academic - I know when I say: "dilution of concentrated sulphuric acid must be done by pouring it into water, and not water into it" and a student asks a question "why is that so", he thinks, and when a student simply accepts that declaration, he doesn't have the desire or energy to investigate the rationale behind my statement. Hence, I request you - please do not irritate yourself if somebody asks a question the answer to which is obvious to you.
Nothing personal against you. Be well.
--
Shriramana Sharma
http://samvit.org
| < Previous | Next > |