Doug remarked: I wasn't asking permission, I was asking what the devil this is (subfs), and why we should have it at all? /rant on It also seems to me, that if Linux is to become a desktop system, it has to become more user-friendly, not less. If it is only going to be used in the corporate workplace, then probably a lot of these protective devices need to be in place, but if I'm going to use it in my home--without any kids, even--then there should be a simple way to turn most of these protections off. There does not seem to be any real need to prevent the user from writing to most of the media, except the root files. There might be a simple setup to allow a few users (mom, Pop, and the kids) separate permissions, but the idea of preventing anyone from doing anything ever is ridiculous. And, even someone in an office might like to copy something to a floppy or a CD for safe keeping. Yeah, maybe Linux doesn't crash, but systems do. rant off/ --doug =============== Doug, You obviously haven't seen 9.1 yet or you would have a better understanding of the subfs system. As Patrick pointed out, it is indeed something to add user friendliness to the Linux desktop. It is something that is needed to draw other OS users to Linux on the desktop. How many times have you tried explaining to someone why you have to "mount" or "unmount" removable drives in Linux? They begin to think you are talking about your computer in sexual terms after a bit! ;o) That is the reason for subfs system, to eliminate that. I think this relates to the "supermount" project, which kinda died and is now the "submount" thing in SuSE. You no longer have to mount or unmount, it's done automatically with this. Just put a disc/disk in, it reads it, opens it and when done, hit the eject button on the drive! I too agree with Patrick, in that a bit of reading before ranting might have helped to prevent the rant. ;o) As always, Linux is about choice and you can revert your setup back to the old way, if you so desire. So far, I haven't seen any reason to do that as this is quite convenient and I'm already spoiled. Regards, Lee -- --- KMail v1.6.2 --- SuSE Linux Pro v9.1 --- Registered Linux User #225206 On any other day, that might seem strange...
Well...let me that this one step further... As I remember...linux was SUPPOSED to be this big, open source, FREE o/s and supporting tools/utils, FREE to the community, some kind of a FREE throwback to the commune and hippy days....this big community movement to provide a solid FREE environment that was supposed to be more robust that the virus ridden blue screen of death crap we get from someone else. Well....has anyone tried to download a power-PC version of suse? Is anyone watching what's going on in the red hat arena? Guess what folks, this stuff is beginning to cost, and cost alot, almost as much as Windoze$. And, I don't see it getting any cheaper. It would appear that the gratis days are going to be short lived (both power and intel based, etc) and in short order I fear we're going to have to breakout the platinum cards for o/s upgrades... What happened to the grand idea that everyone was telling me about? I think the hook is getting set and the fish are going to be start to be reeled in.... JMHO....I could be wrong....nah...:) -------------------------------------------- On Mon, 7 Jun 2004, BandiPat wrote:
/rant on
It also seems to me, that if Linux is to become a desktop system, it has to become more user-friendly, not less. If it is only going to be used in the corporate workplace, then probably a lot of these protective devices need to be in place, but if I'm going to use it in my home--without any kids, even--then there should be a simple way to turn most of these protections off. There does not seem to be any real need
On Tuesday 08 June 2004 05.50, Don wrote:
Well...let me that this one step further...
As I remember...linux was SUPPOSED to be this big, open source, FREE o/s and supporting tools/utils, FREE to the community, some kind of a FREE throwback to the commune and hippy days....this big community movement to provide a solid FREE environment that was supposed to be more robust that the virus ridden blue screen of death crap we get from someone else.
Your trouble is that your first language is English. You have a prejudiced opinion of the meaning of the word 'free'. It's not 'free' as in 'Buy one, get one free', it's 'free' as in 'Live free or die'. It has nothing to do with cost.
Well....has anyone tried to download a power-PC version of suse?
If you buy one, the license allows you to put it up for gratis download. suse is under no obligation to give it away, they just can't prevent their customers from doing it. If it's that important to you, buy it and give it away.
Is anyone watching what's going on in the red hat arena?
Guess what folks, this stuff is beginning to cost, and cost alot, almost as much as Windoze$. And, I don't see it getting any cheaper.
It would appear that the gratis days are going to be short lived (both power and intel based, etc) and in short order I fear we're going to have to breakout the platinum cards for o/s upgrades...
What happened to the grand idea that everyone was telling me about?
Those people were wrong from the outset. When Stallman wrote emacs, you could get it from him, but it would cost you money. Even back then it was never about no-cost software, it was about freedom
Anders Johansson wrote:
On Tuesday 08 June 2004 05.50, Don wrote:
Well...let me that this one step further...
As I remember...linux was SUPPOSED to be this big, open source, FREE o/s and supporting tools/utils, FREE to the community, some kind of a FREE throwback to the commune and hippy days....this big community movement to provide a solid FREE environment that was supposed to be more robust that the virus ridden blue screen of death crap we get from someone else.
Your trouble is that your first language is English. You have a prejudiced opinion of the meaning of the word 'free'. It's not 'free' as in 'Buy one, get one free', it's 'free' as in 'Live free or die'. It has nothing to do with cost.
Well....has anyone tried to download a power-PC version of suse?
If you buy one, the license allows you to put it up for gratis download. suse is under no obligation to give it away, they just can't prevent their customers from doing it. If it's that important to you, buy it and give it away.
Is anyone watching what's going on in the red hat arena?
Guess what folks, this stuff is beginning to cost, and cost alot, almost as much as Windoze$. And, I don't see it getting any cheaper.
It would appear that the gratis days are going to be short lived (both power and intel based, etc) and in short order I fear we're going to have to breakout the platinum cards for o/s upgrades...
What happened to the grand idea that everyone was telling me about?
Those people were wrong from the outset. When Stallman wrote emacs, you could get it from him, but it would cost you money. Even back then it was never about no-cost software, it was about freedom
Ditto. All you have to do is read the Free Software Foundation's web site. Stallman charged a pretty penny for emacs, too! I think a lot of people are afraid to charge fees due to not properly understanding the word "free". Of course, many are simply good-hearted developers contributing to the community-at-large. Don -- Don Parris Webmaster Matheteuo Christian Fellowship Charlotte, NC http://matheteuo.org/ webdev@matheteuo.org
On Mon, 2004-06-07 at 21:00, Anders Johansson wrote:
On Tuesday 08 June 2004 05.50, Don wrote:
Well...let me that this one step further...
As I remember...linux was SUPPOSED to be this big, open source, FREE o/s and supporting tools/utils, FREE to the community, some kind of a FREE throwback to the commune and hippy days....this big community movement to provide a solid FREE environment that was supposed to be more robust that the virus ridden blue screen of death crap we get from someone else.
Your trouble is that your first language is English. You have a prejudiced opinion of the meaning of the word 'free'. It's not 'free' as in 'Buy one, get one free', it's 'free' as in 'Live free or die'. It has nothing to do with cost.
Well....has anyone tried to download a power-PC version of suse?
If you buy one, the license allows you to put it up for gratis download. suse is under no obligation to give it away, they just can't prevent their customers from doing it. If it's that important to you, buy it and give it away.
Is anyone watching what's going on in the red hat arena?
Guess what folks, this stuff is beginning to cost, and cost alot, almost as much as Windoze$. And, I don't see it getting any cheaper.
It would appear that the gratis days are going to be short lived (both power and intel based, etc) and in short order I fear we're going to have to breakout the platinum cards for o/s upgrades...
What happened to the grand idea that everyone was telling me about?
Those people were wrong from the outset. When Stallman wrote emacs, you could get it from him, but it would cost you money. Even back then it was never about no-cost software, it was about freedom
Think Ander's hit the nail on the head. If you're used to FreeWare that is available primarily on Windows its not the same as Open Source; Open Source not only gives you the source code with a very liberal license, but also gives you the knowledge that should something happen your data should be safe. In Freeware the author can easily chaneg the terms and move to payware quickly and easily, leaving the end user with few choices, and most of those expensive. Matt
On Mon, 2004-06-07 at 20:50, Don wrote:
Well...let me that this one step further...
As I remember...linux was SUPPOSED to be this big, open source, FREE o/s and supporting tools/utils, FREE to the community, some kind of a FREE throwback to the commune and hippy days....this big community movement to provide a solid FREE environment that was supposed to be more robust that the virus ridden blue screen of death crap we get from someone else.
Linux still is, get it from http://www.kernel.org. Linux is just the kernel remember, you're talking about all the other utilities and nothing has been there to stop commercial close source app's from appearing.
Well....has anyone tried to download a power-PC version of suse? Is anyone watching what's going on in the red hat arena?
Red Hat has always been the way they are now, just have more money to do it. Why should SuSE make a PowerPC version if not enough people will buy it? Leave feedback to SuSE if you want it.
Guess what folks, this stuff is beginning to cost, and cost alot, almost as much as Windoze$. And, I don't see it getting any cheaper.
If you want cheap go Debian or Slackware. Distributions will exist to cater for each and every person, and each has their own pitfalls. Yes prices do increase, but the amount of money flowing in Linux/Open Source has increased considerably.
It would appear that the gratis days are going to be short lived (both power and intel based, etc) and in short order I fear we're going to have to breakout the platinum cards for o/s upgrades...
Always been that way for SuSE for quite awhile, unless you wait for a month for FTP downloads. Yes, the packaged software, with non-free parts will cost money, but you should also expect more (and know that the money you spent will be going to open source projects such as KDE).
What happened to the grand idea that everyone was telling me about?
Its still going strong, if you can separate Linux and all those GNU free Open Source tools from what a distribution is. Of course as the market increases you're going to get commercial non-free non-open source apps appearing, but you are also going to get more Oepn Source applciations gaining strength too. Heck, Novell/SuSE recently Open Sourced Yast.
I think the hook is getting set and the fish are going to be start to be reeled in....
JMHO....I could be wrong....nah...:)
Not entirely wrong :).
--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 7 Jun 2004, BandiPat wrote:
/rant on
It also seems to me, that if Linux is to become a desktop system, it has to become more user-friendly, not less. If it is only going to be used in the corporate workplace, then probably a lot of these protective devices need to be in place, but if I'm going to use it in my home--without any kids, even--then there should be a simple way to turn most of these protections off. There does not seem to be any real need
On Mon, 2004-06-07 at 21:10, Matthew wrote:
Always been that way for SuSE for quite awhile, unless you wait for a month for FTP downloads. Yes, the packaged software, with non-free parts will cost money, but you should also expect more (and know that the money you spent will be going to open source projects such as KDE).
Yeah, I forgot to mention this in my reply. This is the way I've always looked at it. I pay for SuSE (or Mandrake or Red Hat or whatever, I've bought lots of distros) and in return I'm funding the development of software I can always use, regardless if no one wraps it up neat and nice like SuSE does. It's always still there. I may just get a crappier version of the whole bundle when the day comes that the big companies decide to charge too much. Hopefully that day won't come in SuSE's case. Hopefully they're smarter than that, but the point is that my money didn't go to waste. It paid for development that is going to continue to benefit me and other users for some time. Preston
On Monday 07 June 2004 11:50 pm, Don wrote:
Well...let me that this one step further...
As I remember...linux was SUPPOSED to be this big, open source, FREE o/s and supporting tools/utils, FREE to the community, some kind of a FREE throwback to the commune and hippy days....this big community movement to provide a solid FREE environment that was supposed to be more robust that the virus ridden blue screen of death crap we get from someone else.
Well....has anyone tried to download a power-PC version of suse? Is anyone watching what's going on in the red hat arena?
Guess what folks, this stuff is beginning to cost, and cost alot, almost as much as Windoze$. And, I don't see it getting any cheaper.
It would appear that the gratis days are going to be short lived (both power and intel based, etc) and in short order I fear we're going to have to breakout the platinum cards for o/s upgrades...
What happened to the grand idea that everyone was telling me about?
I think the hook is getting set and the fish are going to be start to be reeled in....
JMHO....I could be wrong....nah...:) --------------------------------------------
Don, No need to send out 2 copies, I read the list mail, else how could I have seen the message in the first place? ;o) I know, it's easy to get carried away with the reply button when ranting. Actually, I do disagree with your thoughts. Linux is as it always was and that won't change, Linus and the guys saw to that. What the RH & SuSE folks make their money from is the hard work they put into these things to make them easy for us. Ever thought about how many days, months, it would take for you to put together the same amount of software? How about the support they give to business and the user, if they want it, would you be willing to do it for free? I think you just got things confused a bit and didn't think out your response before jumping on the keyboard. PowerPC SuSE, although discontinued as a package offering, it is still very much available via ftp install or as a business package. Where do you think the IBM powerpc Linux is coming from? Many of IBM servers are PowerPC, since they do make the chips, so having a Linux for it kinda helps, don't you think? As this is starting to get off topic and more rants than reason, we should take it to OT, if anyone wants to continue it please. This is not the list for ranting, most prefer reason. ;o) Lee -- --- KMail v1.6.2 --- SuSE Linux Pro v9.1 --- Registered Linux User #225206 On any other day, that might seem strange...
On June 7, 2004 21:50, Don wrote:
Well...let me that this one step further...
As I remember...linux was SUPPOSED to be this big, open source, FREE o/s and supporting tools/utils, FREE to the community, some kind of a FREE throwback to the commune and hippy days....this big community movement to provide a solid FREE environment that was supposed to be more robust that the virus ridden blue screen of death crap we get from someone else. Yes it still is free. You can download the entire thing yourself and compile it yourself. Work out compatability issues yourself. OR you can pay someone to do it for you....
Well....has anyone tried to download a power-PC version of suse? Is anyone watching what's going on in the red hat arena?
Guess what folks, this stuff is beginning to cost, and cost alot, almost as much as Windoze$. And, I don't see it getting any cheaper.
It would appear that the gratis days are going to be short lived (both power and intel based, etc) and in short order I fear we're going to have to breakout the platinum cards for o/s upgrades...
What happened to the grand idea that everyone was telling me about?
I think the hook is getting set and the fish are going to be start to be reeled in....
JMHO....I could be wrong....nah...:) --------------------------------------------
On Mon, 2004-06-07 at 20:50, Don wrote:
It would appear that the gratis days are going to be short lived (both power and intel based, etc) and in short order I fear we're going to have to breakout the platinum cards for o/s upgrades...
With regards to OSes like SuSE and Red Hat you might be right. That's why I left SuSE briefly for Fedora, because I didn't want to see Pro disappear in favor of a $100 a year mandatory subscription or you don't get updates. If that ever happens SuSE loses me (again, for good this time) as a customer. However, the thing you have to remember is that there's always a distro out there somewhere that's easy to use and truly free (as in beer). Gentoo comes to mind. Debian, of course. There are others. There will always be a group of people that desire a free alternative. That's the beauty of it. If SuSE starts charging $100 per year to use SuSE... If you get a SuSE tax like there's a Red Hat tax, then you'll see people fork Fedora (or some other distro) and make it their own distro and support it themselves. Maybe even SuSE, stripping out the non-OSS stuff of course.
What happened to the grand idea that everyone was telling me about?
Who told you this grand idea? The world is pretty complex.
I think the hook is getting set and the fish are going to be start to be reeled in....
JMHO....I could be wrong....nah...:)
If you adjust your tinfoil hat just right you won't get reeled in. That would be my advice. Preston
On Tuesday 08 June 2004 04:35, BandiPat wrote: <etc>
Doug,
You obviously haven't seen 9.1 yet or you would have a better understanding of the subfs system. As Patrick pointed out, it is indeed something to add user friendliness to the Linux desktop. It is something that is needed to draw other OS users to Linux on the desktop. How many times have you tried explaining to someone why you have to "mount" or "unmount" removable drives in Linux? They begin to think you are talking about your computer in sexual terms after a bit! ;o)
That is the reason for subfs system, to eliminate that. I think this relates to the "supermount" project, which kinda died and is now the "submount" thing in SuSE. You no longer have to mount or unmount, it's done automatically with this. Just put a disc/disk in, it reads it, opens it and when done, hit the eject button on the drive! I too agree with Patrick, in that a bit of reading before ranting might have helped to prevent the rant. ;o)
Yes, but it doesn't work properly yet, that's the point. I agree it will be excellent when finished, but for the present release it's working a lot less well here than the system under 9.0 and before that everyone understood. And experience with other systems tends to make everyone particularly sensitive to parts of the OS that step in and take over to be 'helpful' only to screw things up and leave the user without an obvious means of manual intervention. It's obviously a matter of luck, but here at least on several previously highly reliable systems 9.1 has left usb handling far weaker and far less predictable than in previous versions.
As always, Linux is about choice and you can revert your setup back to the old way, if you so desire. So far, I haven't seen any reason to do that as this is quite convenient and I'm already spoiled.
Perhaps the means of reversion should have been better advertised and subfs described as experimental. I certainly wouldn't wish to see its inventors and developers discouraged, as it will be very nice when it's finished, but it ain't right yet. Best Fergus
Regards, Lee
-- --- KMail v1.6.2 --- SuSE Linux Pro v9.1 --- Registered Linux User #225206 On any other day, that might seem strange...
-- Fergus Wilde Chetham's Library Long Millgate Manchester M3 1SB Tel: +44 161 834 7961 Fax: +44 161 839 5797 http://www.chethams.org.uk
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 09:53, Fergus Wilde wrote:
On Tuesday 08 June 2004 04:35, BandiPat wrote: <etc>
Doug,
You obviously haven't seen 9.1 yet or you would have a better understanding of the subfs system. As Patrick pointed out, it is indeed something to add user friendliness to the Linux desktop. It is something that is needed to draw other OS users to Linux on the desktop. How many times have you tried explaining to someone why you have to "mount" or "unmount" removable drives in Linux? They begin to think you are talking about your computer in sexual terms after a bit! ;o)
That is the reason for subfs system, to eliminate that. I think this relates to the "supermount" project, which kinda died and is now the "submount" thing in SuSE. You no longer have to mount or unmount, it's done automatically with this. Just put a disc/disk in, it reads it, opens it and when done, hit the eject button on the drive! I too agree with Patrick, in that a bit of reading before ranting might have helped to prevent the rant. ;o)
Yes, but it doesn't work properly yet, that's the point. I agree it will be excellent when finished, but for the present release it's working a lot less well here than the system under 9.0 and before that everyone understood. And experience with other systems tends to make everyone particularly sensitive to parts of the OS that step in and take over to be 'helpful' only to screw things up and leave the user without an obvious means of manual intervention. It's obviously a matter of luck, but here at least on several previously highly reliable systems 9.1 has left usb handling far weaker and far less predictable than in previous versions.
As always, Linux is about choice and you can revert your setup back to the old way, if you so desire. So far, I haven't seen any reason to do that as this is quite convenient and I'm already spoiled.
Perhaps the means of reversion should have been better advertised and subfs described as experimental. I certainly wouldn't wish to see its inventors and developers discouraged, as it will be very nice when it's finished, but it ain't right yet.
My view on this is that supermount/submount/subfs or whatever name it
has these days is the future of Linux to handle removable media (floppy,
cd, dvd, usb, firewire) and it needs exposure to the wild masses ;)
Yes it's still not perfect but if it's left as an option it will get
less testing... Unfortunately and that is a drawback (or an advantage)
of open source where some things can't be tested fully without the help
of us, users.
--
Frederic Soulier
Fergus Wilde wrote:
Yes, but it doesn't work properly yet, that's the point. I agree it will be excellent when finished, but for the present release it's working a lot less well here than the system under 9.0 and before that everyone understood. And experience with other systems tends to make everyone particularly sensitive to parts of the OS that step in and take over to be 'helpful' only to screw things up and leave the user without an obvious means of manual intervention. It's obviously a matter of luck, but here at least on several previously highly reliable systems 9.1 has left usb handling far weaker and far less predictable than in previous versions.
As always, Linux is about choice and you can revert your setup back to the old way, if you so desire. So far, I haven't seen any reason to do that as this is quite convenient and I'm already spoiled.
Perhaps the means of reversion should have been better advertised and subfs described as experimental. I certainly wouldn't wish to see its inventors and developers discouraged, as it will be very nice when it's finished, but it ain't right yet. Best Fergus
Wow, very nice reflection on the matter. I didn't realize this thread was going on before starting another rant about it below. The question now should be, how can we as the user community, who seem to be building a consensus on this that the new subfs stuff, convey our views to the Suse developers? The consensus that I think is developing about the USB subfs stuff is: 1. would be great if it was dependable and polished, 2. should have configuration options in Yast with fine grained control over its applicability to both fixed drives with removable media like CDs and floppies, and hotpluggable drives like USB sticks, 3. shouldn't have been forced upon the users by default in 9.1 since it both isn't perfectly dependable yet AND is so radically different from what we were used to in <=9.0. Good day! -- ____________________________________ Christopher R. Carlen Principal Laser/Optical Technologist Sandia National Laboratories CA USA crcarle@sandia.gov
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 14:05, Chris Carlen wrote:
Perhaps the means of reversion should have been better advertised and subfs described as experimental. I certainly wouldn't wish to see its inventors and developers discouraged, as it will be very nice when it's finished, but it ain't right yet. Best Fergus
Wow, very nice reflection on the matter. I didn't realize this thread was going on before starting another rant about it below. The question now should be, how can we as the user community, who seem to be building a consensus on this that the new subfs stuff, convey our views to the Suse developers?
The consensus that I think is developing about the USB subfs stuff is:
1. would be great if it was dependable and polished, 2. should have configuration options in Yast with fine grained control over its applicability to both fixed drives with removable media like CDs and floppies, and hotpluggable drives like USB sticks, 3. shouldn't have been forced upon the users by default in 9.1 since it both isn't perfectly dependable yet AND is so radically different from what we were used to in <=9.0.
Good day!
I was going to keep out of this because it is all a matter of opinion, but my $.02. If all of the manufacturers of all of this lastest and greatest hardware would do for linux what they do for M$ there would not be any problems. It is the manufacturers that supply the drivers. AND they rarely supply drivers for linux. THAT IS THE PROBLEM! SuSE provides a great distro, BUT they do not manufacture the hardware so why bitch at them for NOT supplying the driver! Bitch at the manufacturer. -- Ken Schneider unix user since 1989 linux user since 1994 SuSE user since 1998 (5.2)
SuSE provides a great distro, BUT they do not manufacture the hardware so why bitch at them for NOT supplying the driver! Bitch at the manufacturer.
-- Ken Schneider unix user since 1989 linux user since 1994 SuSE user since 1998 (5.2) This is exactly the problem. I've only come across a couple of pieces of hardware that claimed to have worked with linux. One is the Zumi USB sticks and the other was an Epson printer. Unfortunately the printer was so difficult to get working I took it back and bought an HP which works pretty darn well. The biggest problem was that the driver was for an old version of Cups and the newer version which came with the Distro refused to accept it. To make matters worse they didn't suppy an updated driver on their website. I wrote them a letter, yes with a pen and paper, and explained to them the
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On June 8, 2004 12:17, Ken Schneider wrote: //--cut--- problem and they still have yet to respond at all. This is USELESS support. By the way there was updates for Windows and Mac drivers for it. Alot of manufactures claim that there is little or no use to support linux because nobody who uses linux buys their products. Well I say, "Its no freakin' wonder!" Saskman -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAxg6Z78XslDXRZfsRAnIGAJ0XJveH5WEzWljWYf/kZ3JELNY5mwCgz6TU 4x0g47lg+QgIx86o9nMj7zs= =tq/m -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hi all... The only problem I've had with subfs is when I try to use a disk that is bad. If the cd has a bad file system, subfs just keeps trying to read it and will not stop. I end up having to do a reboot to get it out. Any ideas how to stop this? Also when I have a disk in the drive, but I am not using it, "ls" does not report it. Otherwise I kind of like it..... JIM -- Jim Hatridge Linux User #88484 "Lighting the fires of Liberty, one heart at a time!" Badnarik for President http://www.badnarik.org ------------------------------------------------------ BayerWulf Linux System # 129656 The Recycled Beowulf Project Looking for throw-away or obsolete computers and parts to recycle into a Linux super computer WartHog Bulletin Info about new German Stamps http://www.fuzzybunnymilitia.org/~hatridge/bulletin Viel Feind -- Viel Ehr' Anti-US Propaganda stamp collection http://www.fuzzybunnymilitia.org/~hatridge/collection
I did not really want to take this into the general discussion, but I suppose I am forced into it. I replied to Pat Shanahan off-list, but it seems that it will persist. I told him, as I will tell all of you now, that I doubt if anyone will read the 2 books provided with the distro from page 1 to the end. And most of the questions I have are not addressed in the the indices. For example, I asked on the list the other day about sudo and sux. Not in the indices. I asked about writing to floppies. Not in the indices. I asked about subfs. No such information referenced. I have at least 3 times as many books on Linux and Unix as I ever had on other systems--CPM. DOS, Windows. I have read portions of all of them, and I have used the index pages of all of them, and sometimes I even find what I'm looking for. I am aware that I can log on as root and do almost anything. What I am not aware of, is how to make the system user friendly to a USER, so he can copy files to floppies, or whatever, without becoming root--which, in a corporate atmosphere, he would not be allowed to do. I'm afraid I do not understand the logic. BTW, it has been my experience with 9.1, which I'm using, is that the auto-mount feature works, but the auto-unmount feature does not. I always have to become root and umount and eject to get anything out of the DVD drive. So much for subfs, whatever it may be. (Tell me what page, please.) --doug On Monday 07 June 2004 23:35, BandiPat wrote:
Doug remarked: I wasn't asking permission, I was asking what the devil this is (subfs), and why we should have it at all?
/rant on
It also seems to me, that if Linux is to become a desktop system, it has to become more user-friendly, not less. If it is only going to be used in the corporate workplace, then probably a lot of these protective devices need to be in place, but if I'm going to use it in my home--without any kids, even--then there should be a simple way to turn most of these protections off. There does not seem to be any real need to prevent the user from writing to most of the media, except the root files. There might be a simple setup to allow a few users (mom, Pop, and the kids) separate permissions, but the idea of preventing anyone from doing anything ever is ridiculous.
And, even someone in an office might like to copy something to a floppy or a CD for safe keeping. Yeah, maybe Linux doesn't crash, but systems do.
rant off/
--doug ===============
Doug,
You obviously haven't seen 9.1 yet or you would have a better understanding of the subfs system. As Patrick pointed out, it is indeed something to add user friendliness to the Linux desktop. It is something that is needed to draw other OS users to Linux on the desktop. How many times have you tried explaining to someone why you have to "mount" or "unmount" removable drives in Linux? They begin to think you are talking about your computer in sexual terms after a bit! ;o)
That is the reason for subfs system, to eliminate that. I think this relates to the "supermount" project, which kinda died and is now the "submount" thing in SuSE. You no longer have to mount or unmount, it's done automatically with this. Just put a disc/disk in, it reads it, opens it and when done, hit the eject button on the drive! I too agree with Patrick, in that a bit of reading before ranting might have helped to prevent the rant. ;o)
As always, Linux is about choice and you can revert your setup back to the old way, if you so desire. So far, I haven't seen any reason to do that as this is quite convenient and I'm already spoiled.
Regards, Lee
-- --- KMail v1.6.2 --- SuSE Linux Pro v9.1 --- Registered Linux User #225206 On any other day, that might seem strange...
lookup the "sudo" command with man I think that is what your looking for if I understand you properly B-) On Tuesday 08 June 2004 06:20 pm, Doug McGarrett wrote:
I did not really want to take this into the general discussion, but I suppose I am forced into it. I replied to Pat Shanahan off-list, but it seems that it will persist.
I told him, as I will tell all of you now, that I doubt if anyone will read the 2 books provided with the distro from page 1 to the end. And most of the questions I have are not addressed in the the indices. For example, I asked on the list the other day about sudo and sux. Not in the indices. I asked about writing to floppies. Not in the indices. I asked about subfs. No such information referenced. I have at least 3 times as many books on Linux and Unix as I ever had on other systems--CPM. DOS, Windows. I have read portions of all of them, and I have used the index pages of all of them, and sometimes I even find what I'm looking for. I am aware that I can log on as root and do almost anything. What I am not aware of, is how to make the system user friendly to a USER, so he can copy files to floppies, or whatever, without becoming root--which, in a corporate atmosphere, he would not be allowed to do. I'm afraid I do not understand the logic.
BTW, it has been my experience with 9.1, which I'm using, is that the auto-mount feature works, but the auto-unmount feature does not. I always have to become root and umount and eject to get anything out of the DVD drive. So much for subfs, whatever it may be. (Tell me what page, please.)
--doug
On Monday 07 June 2004 23:35, BandiPat wrote:
Doug remarked: I wasn't asking permission, I was asking what the devil this is (subfs), and why we should have it at all?
/rant on
It also seems to me, that if Linux is to become a desktop system, it has to become more user-friendly, not less. If it is only going to be used in the corporate workplace, then probably a lot of these protective devices need to be in place, but if I'm going to use it in my home--without any kids, even--then there should be a simple way to turn most of these protections off. There does not seem to be any real need to prevent the user from writing to most of the media, except the root files. There might be a simple setup to allow a few users (mom, Pop, and the kids) separate permissions, but the idea of preventing anyone from doing anything ever is ridiculous.
And, even someone in an office might like to copy something to a floppy or a CD for safe keeping. Yeah, maybe Linux doesn't crash, but systems do.
rant off/
--doug ===============
Doug,
You obviously haven't seen 9.1 yet or you would have a better understanding of the subfs system. As Patrick pointed out, it is indeed something to add user friendliness to the Linux desktop. It is something that is needed to draw other OS users to Linux on the desktop. How many times have you tried explaining to someone why you have to "mount" or "unmount" removable drives in Linux? They begin to think you are talking about your computer in sexual terms after a bit! ;o)
That is the reason for subfs system, to eliminate that. I think this relates to the "supermount" project, which kinda died and is now the "submount" thing in SuSE. You no longer have to mount or unmount, it's done automatically with this. Just put a disc/disk in, it reads it, opens it and when done, hit the eject button on the drive! I too agree with Patrick, in that a bit of reading before ranting might have helped to prevent the rant. ;o)
As always, Linux is about choice and you can revert your setup back to the old way, if you so desire. So far, I haven't seen any reason to do that as this is quite convenient and I'm already spoiled.
Regards, Lee
-- --- KMail v1.6.2 --- SuSE Linux Pro v9.1 --- Registered Linux User #225206 On any other day, that might seem strange...
participants (14)
-
Anders Johansson -
BandiPat -
Brad Bourn -
Chris Carlen -
Don -
Don Parris -
Doug McGarrett -
Fergus Wilde -
Frederic Soulier -
James Hatridge -
Ken Schneider -
Matthew -
Preston Crawford -
Saskman