But the article describes how Torvalds "blew up" when his daughter had to have an admin password to print a paper and then the article explains why....but then goes on to suggest the he try Linux Mint or it's Cinnamony falvour...a rather humorous article ...really...
What about something like this, for example:bimsebasse wrote:I don't think I have a grumpy Torvalds rant in me but man am I tired of password prompts in Linux, I think I see around 30 of those a day and it's way too many.
Code: Select all
alias nm='echo "yourpassword" | sudo -S service network-manager restart'Indeedbimsebasse wrote:I think I see around 30 of those a day and it's way too many.
But what do you do to get so many of them?Besides the desktop background one, all of those actions require access to root-only writable files. They change certain GLOBAL aspects of the system that not only affect your user, but any other users on the system. Now, regardless if you're the only user on the system, the point still remains that you're dealing with SYSTEM-WIDE configurations and files. So, it is a little necessary.nomko wrote:The only time i want to be asked for my root password is when i install a program or make (crucial/critical) changes in my settings. And also when i perform a sudo command in the terminal. That are the moments you can bug me asking my root password.
Root password for adding a printer??? Ridiculous!
Root password for changing the time zone??? Ridiculous!
Root password for changing the (let's say) desktop background??? That would be stupid.
Root password for changing the (let's say) the standard system fonts??? That would be stupid as well.
As long nothing critical or crucial can be changed, skip the whole "root password required" procedure.
Your kidding right? (I hope).... root acces for changing standard fonts???? Desktop > right click > Change Background and then select the tab Fonts.... no root acces required.KittyKatt wrote:Besides the desktop background one, all of those actions require access to root-only writable files.
Yes, for critical or crucial actions/changes such as installing software, cleaning your system (sudo apt-get autoremove/autoclean) you're right. But some actions like adding a printer i never had to provide my password.They change certain GLOBAL aspects of the system that not only affect your user, but any other users on the system. Now, regardless if you're the only user on the system, the point still remains that you're dealing with SYSTEM-WIDE configurations and files. So, it is a little necessary.
Well, if you're install system-wide fonts, they'd be going in /usr/share/fonts/. I misread "changing" for "installing". My bad.nomko wrote:Your kidding right? (I hope).... root acces for changing standard fonts???? Desktop > right click > Change Background and then select the tab Fonts.... no root acces required.KittyKatt wrote:Besides the desktop background one, all of those actions require access to root-only writable files.
Yes, for critical or crucial actions/changes such as installing software, cleaning your system (sudo apt-get autoremove/autoclean) you're right. But some actions like adding a printer i never had to provide my password.They change certain GLOBAL aspects of the system that not only affect your user, but any other users on the system. Now, regardless if you're the only user on the system, the point still remains that you're dealing with SYSTEM-WIDE configurations and files. So, it is a little necessary.
Ah, see that's interesting. I haven't even been in a GNOME3 environment YET. I like to stick to my DE-less existence. So, I could be wrong on a couple of things.AlbertP wrote:system-config-printer installs printers in your own user account if you aren't root - unless you make a printer available to all users which requires root access. But Gnome 3's printer configuration tool requires you to be root. Anyway, the old system-config-printer which Gnome 2 distros used is still available from the command-line, possibly because Mate still uses it.
I think we all need to get used to some changed here and there. I noticed some slight differences between Gnome 2 and Gnome 3 and i'm not talking about the desktop environment.KittyKatt wrote:Ah, see that's interesting. I haven't even been in a GNOME3 environment YET. I like to stick to my DE-less existence. So, I could be wrong on a couple of things.
