Anyway to run as administrator?
Forum rules
There are no such things as "stupid" questions. However if you think your question is a bit stupid, then this is the right place for you to post it. Stick to easy to-the-point questions that you feel people can answer fast. For long and complicated questions use the other forums in the support section.
Before you post read how to get help. Topics in this forum are automatically closed 6 months after creation.
There are no such things as "stupid" questions. However if you think your question is a bit stupid, then this is the right place for you to post it. Stick to easy to-the-point questions that you feel people can answer fast. For long and complicated questions use the other forums in the support section.
Before you post read how to get help. Topics in this forum are automatically closed 6 months after creation.
-
Lyric Suite
Anyway to run as administrator?
Having to type my password for nearly everything i do in my computer is becoming quite annoying. Is there a way to permanently acquire sudo privileges by default?
Last edited by LockBot on Wed Dec 28, 2022 7:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Topic automatically closed 6 months after creation. New replies are no longer allowed.
Reason: Topic automatically closed 6 months after creation. New replies are no longer allowed.
-
trollboy
Re: Anyway to run as administrator?
Lyric Suite wrote:Having to type my password for nearly everything i do in my computer is becoming quite annoying. Is there a way to permanently acquire sudo privileges by default?
Nope. It's a bad idea anyway
But you can open a root terminal session by running the command sudo -i and you can open a root file browser by pressing Alt + F2 and running gksu nautilus (or thunar or dolphin etc depending on which version you run)
Re: Anyway to run as administrator?
On some things you can configure the application so you don't have to use the root pwd like the autologin, the "Available to all users" option on network-manager, etc.
Some distros, like Puppy only have the root user so you don't need the pwd at all.
Some distros, like Puppy only have the root user so you don't need the pwd at all.
-
daveinuk
- Level 7
- Posts: 1559
- Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 7:52 pm
- Location: Manchester, England.
- Contact:
Re: Anyway to run as administrator?
Lyric Suite, feel free to check out some of my older posts, there's a 'debate' in one on the exact same subject and it comes up a lot here especially from people I assume (like you and I ) that are linux newbs coming from windows ?
The best I can tell you is to look into the reasons WHY linux is set up the way it is and why you don't have root permissions 'as standard' and then you may appreciate why they do it this way - Have a read of this thread http://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?f=90&t=74528 and especially the post by Thethistleweb, he really explains it clearly, as did another poster in a previous thread of mine.
I'll agree that it does 'seem' annoying at first, like you're being 'nanny'd' but . . .. there are settings that can be changed to make it so there are less password inputs to the point where i only put my pass in to log in, and then to make changes, install software etc, it's not THAT often and you get used to it, that may not be what you want to hear but in reality it does make the best sense, and I never thought I'd type that lol
Plus as a 'newb' it's likely to protect you from yourself while you're still learning! I've lost count of the installs i've done through cocking the system up thinking i knew what i was doing, it's a lot different (thankfully) and a learning curve coming from windows, but it's actually in place for your own good, and not in a nannying way when you understand the difference of having root ownership and it being a separate entity, now i wouldn't have it any other way, and I understand better why my mate's always phoning me up to go and look at his Vista laptop . . . . . .
A lot of people post the same question when they first come here and it's not surprising, understanding why it is set up this way takes a lot of patience at first which I think some of the regular posters that have been on linux for years forget when they're answering 'newbs' but they do have the best intentions, they're used to it, we're not, it's easy to forget how difficult it can be making the migration.
When you realise that there are actually real advantages in this setup and why, will you appreciate how well thought out this operating system really is in terms of the way it 'looks after you' and the freedom it gives you, and how customisable it is, but all that only comes with experience, stick with it for now and in a few months time it will become second nature hopefully. I've had loads of fun learning so far and loads of frustrations but I kind of knew that was going to be the case before i started.
Being 'root' isn't all it's cracked up to be believe me lol . . . . It will cause you more problems than it's worth when you're learning, I know this from experience, maybe it was me, maybe not . . . . I'll tell you when I've found out . . . .
The best I can tell you is to look into the reasons WHY linux is set up the way it is and why you don't have root permissions 'as standard' and then you may appreciate why they do it this way - Have a read of this thread http://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?f=90&t=74528 and especially the post by Thethistleweb, he really explains it clearly, as did another poster in a previous thread of mine.
I'll agree that it does 'seem' annoying at first, like you're being 'nanny'd' but . . .. there are settings that can be changed to make it so there are less password inputs to the point where i only put my pass in to log in, and then to make changes, install software etc, it's not THAT often and you get used to it, that may not be what you want to hear but in reality it does make the best sense, and I never thought I'd type that lol
Plus as a 'newb' it's likely to protect you from yourself while you're still learning! I've lost count of the installs i've done through cocking the system up thinking i knew what i was doing, it's a lot different (thankfully) and a learning curve coming from windows, but it's actually in place for your own good, and not in a nannying way when you understand the difference of having root ownership and it being a separate entity, now i wouldn't have it any other way, and I understand better why my mate's always phoning me up to go and look at his Vista laptop . . . . . .
A lot of people post the same question when they first come here and it's not surprising, understanding why it is set up this way takes a lot of patience at first which I think some of the regular posters that have been on linux for years forget when they're answering 'newbs' but they do have the best intentions, they're used to it, we're not, it's easy to forget how difficult it can be making the migration.
When you realise that there are actually real advantages in this setup and why, will you appreciate how well thought out this operating system really is in terms of the way it 'looks after you' and the freedom it gives you, and how customisable it is, but all that only comes with experience, stick with it for now and in a few months time it will become second nature hopefully. I've had loads of fun learning so far and loads of frustrations but I kind of knew that was going to be the case before i started.
Being 'root' isn't all it's cracked up to be believe me lol . . . . It will cause you more problems than it's worth when you're learning, I know this from experience, maybe it was me, maybe not . . . . I'll tell you when I've found out . . . .
-
odo5435
Re: Anyway to run as administrator?
It might be a good idea to have a peek at this thread or this threadand maybe this one too before you make any drastic changes.
In fact, the number of times this subject appears, it'd probably be a good idea if someone made a 'sticky' for the top of this sub-forum advising of the reasons for the password and the dangers of removing it.
In fact, the number of times this subject appears, it'd probably be a good idea if someone made a 'sticky' for the top of this sub-forum advising of the reasons for the password and the dangers of removing it.
-
AdamS
Re: Anyway to run as administrator?
put simple
windows allows full time unfettered access to root via any admin account.
This allows a virus or infectious program to take hold at any time. In many cases, with out notice.
Linux - via any admin account will allow temp access to root via (sudo password). NO program is allowed to install with out notice and entering the sudo password.
It is physically impossible for a virus to install with out offering up you sudo password.
It is one of the main reasons why Linux does not suffer a virus problem, and why windows suffers viruses in the billions.
I would highly suggest you not complain about it and be grateful you can turn on your PC every day and know it just works. Knowing your identity is safe and secure, you wont need to reinstall Linux anything like you would windows.
That said, I suspect this needs to be said. Only way to infect linux is YOU have to do it via sudo or root.
Downloading a infected source and installing it via root or sudo is the only way it happens. Only download via trusted sources and always read the fine print when your (sudo password) is asked for.
windows allows full time unfettered access to root via any admin account.
This allows a virus or infectious program to take hold at any time. In many cases, with out notice.
Linux - via any admin account will allow temp access to root via (sudo password). NO program is allowed to install with out notice and entering the sudo password.
It is physically impossible for a virus to install with out offering up you sudo password.
It is one of the main reasons why Linux does not suffer a virus problem, and why windows suffers viruses in the billions.
I would highly suggest you not complain about it and be grateful you can turn on your PC every day and know it just works. Knowing your identity is safe and secure, you wont need to reinstall Linux anything like you would windows.
That said, I suspect this needs to be said. Only way to infect linux is YOU have to do it via sudo or root.
Downloading a infected source and installing it via root or sudo is the only way it happens. Only download via trusted sources and always read the fine print when your (sudo password) is asked for.
-
maywind
Re: Anyway to run as administrator?
Anyway, it's better to type the password from time to time than to suffer from viruses. This small inconvenience is not a high price for safety.
-
ThistleWeb
Re: Anyway to run as administrator?
*nix has solid separation between root and user right from the ground up. The only time you need it, is for admin tasks, which for the most part is during the setup and post install. After you get your system setup with the applications you need, configured properly, you'll only need root every few days, or even every week to download and install updates. The vast majority of your time should be perfectly happily spent as a user without any interruptions or prompts, all with the security that you have another layer of protection around you from malware that Windows will never have.
-
wyrdoak
Re: Anyway to run as administrator?
I like it this way, I think M$ did an over kill in Vista and Win7 sometimes it would ask 3 or 4 times about a program, even running as administrator, then every time you ran the program if you didn't tick the right box, it got to the point were you stopped paying attention to the prompt and just clicked ok or turned the prompts off completely.
Buy the time I got Mint the way I want it for now, I know the password, and don't have to write it down somewhere for someone to find.
Buy the time I got Mint the way I want it for now, I know the password, and don't have to write it down somewhere for someone to find.
-
ThistleWeb
Re: Anyway to run as administrator?
This is a major difference between Windows and *nix. Windows was designed as a single user system, it wasn't designed for connecting to the internet. As soon as the internet came, it was susceptible to all sorts of malware and exploits because of it. It took until Vista for Microsoft to spot this, despite it being shouted at them for many years. UAC is a clunky attempt to attach some of that separation onto something it was never designed for.
It's not so much a technical problem, but a problem of being hoisted by their own petard. For years they've insisted their "run as administrator" is perfectly fine, every OEM installs it like this for new users, so every application developer knows almost all of their user base, no matter how experienced will be running as an administrator, so why bother thinking about the proper levels of access their software needs? If they create any part of it with anything less than full administrator, there's every likelihood of support issues when bits don't function. Windows is fighting against any attempt to make their application responsible, if they even bother to try. It takes time for software developers to learn this new found (to the Windows mindset) approach of user / admin, and adjust their stuff accordingly.
In the meantime you have a UAC pop up asking you questions at every turn, that most users don't have a clue what the question is, so they say yes to everything in case something stops working, including saying yes to stuff they want to be saying no to.
Microsoft have finally seen the light on user / admin separation, only 20+ years after *nix has been doing it, but still, better late than never. Vista's was the first attempt, and was widely agreed to be terrible and VERY annoying. By Windows 7 it's tamed back to be less annoying, but it's still a sticky plaster solution compared to something *nix was built to do right from the first bit of code.
It is annoying at first for new users, when I came to Linux I wanted to switch that off too, to use the Windows workflow and logic on Linux, rather than embrace why Linux is different, and adopt the native approaches. Now I appreciate it, and don't think about the root prompt when needed.
It's not so much a technical problem, but a problem of being hoisted by their own petard. For years they've insisted their "run as administrator" is perfectly fine, every OEM installs it like this for new users, so every application developer knows almost all of their user base, no matter how experienced will be running as an administrator, so why bother thinking about the proper levels of access their software needs? If they create any part of it with anything less than full administrator, there's every likelihood of support issues when bits don't function. Windows is fighting against any attempt to make their application responsible, if they even bother to try. It takes time for software developers to learn this new found (to the Windows mindset) approach of user / admin, and adjust their stuff accordingly.
In the meantime you have a UAC pop up asking you questions at every turn, that most users don't have a clue what the question is, so they say yes to everything in case something stops working, including saying yes to stuff they want to be saying no to.
Microsoft have finally seen the light on user / admin separation, only 20+ years after *nix has been doing it, but still, better late than never. Vista's was the first attempt, and was widely agreed to be terrible and VERY annoying. By Windows 7 it's tamed back to be less annoying, but it's still a sticky plaster solution compared to something *nix was built to do right from the first bit of code.
It is annoying at first for new users, when I came to Linux I wanted to switch that off too, to use the Windows workflow and logic on Linux, rather than embrace why Linux is different, and adopt the native approaches. Now I appreciate it, and don't think about the root prompt when needed.