• ranzispa@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Cool, but to be fair Linux is made to not make you root.

    In most cases a sysadmin somewhere is root, and you may only pledge to him by email and wait weeks for when he decides you waited long enough for a reply.

    User permissions are quite strict in Linux.

    I’m still pissed there is no way for a user to decide to open a shared folder to other users which enforces base permissions without root doing that.

    • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I’m still pissed there is no way for a user to decide to open a shared folder to other users which enforces base permissions without root doing that.

      can’t you?

      you can assign a preexisting group to a folder as a secondary owner. or you can do it per-user with ACLs

    • BCsven@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Unless IT has blocked it you should have share options for your Public Folder. At least that’s how it was when we ran it at a company. Every user had access to their own public share to share as needed. It was part of the Unix Model.

    • Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Yea, it’s a completely different security model, due to coming from Unix (a multi-user system) while Windows started as a single-user system.

      Windows is user-centric security, Linux is file/process-centric.

      Linux is arguably better, but it also requires more management.

    • Jesus_666@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Mind you, on my own Linux machine I can become root while on Windows all I can be is someone with admin rights (but subordinate to SYSTEM).

    • over_clox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Officially, I’m not sure.

      But Linux is open source, so you can just print out the image above and slap some double sided tape on it…

      Bonus points if you straighten out the mild trapezoid distortion and maybe apply a little contrast on it using GIMP. 🐧

      • ByteJunk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        The fact that the Linux source code license is open doesn’t give permission to another work about Linux.

        An analogy would be a park - you can use it, go running, etc with no issues. But if you setup your easel and make a painting of the park, that painting is an original creative work, and it is protected under copyright laws.

        The same for that sticker. Even with the image of Tux being made “free” (attribution) by its creator, this stylized combination of drawing and text is still copyrighted, so we’d have to ask their permission for the stickers.

          • ByteJunk@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            53 minutes ago

            That’s unrelated to OPs point that because Linux is FOSS, so is the drawing. As an advocate for open source, I try to clear up this kind of confusion.

  • BillyClark@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Ironic. Most Linux desktop distros now don’t set up a root password, and they make you reboot after many updates.

    • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Make you reboot? More like “suggest a reboot”, and not after “many updates” bit after installing a new kernel or graphics drivers on a running graphical desktop environment. Typically, the latter can also be handled on the command line, and the reboot suggestion is for less tech savvy users

      • dreamy@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        They’re probably talking about offline updates, which are used by Fedora and Ubuntu. They do require you to reboot to apply the updates.

      • BillyClark@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Make you reboot? More like “suggest a reboot”

        They tell the user to reboot, and they don’t phrase it like it is optional. It’s been a while since I’ve used Ubuntu, for example, but my memory is that they say that a reboot is required, or something along those lines. There is nothing wrong with my using the phrase “make you reboot” for those cases.

        not after “many updates” bit after installing a new kernel or graphics drivers on a running graphical desktop environment.

        When I was using Ubuntu, I’d get a reboot request like once every couple of weeks to a month. Maybe you don’t think that’s “many updates”, but the point of the sticker was obviously to compare to other operating systems, and in that regard, it was similar to Windows, probably more frequent.

        • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Ok two things here:

          1. don’t use Ubuntu, canonical began enshittification years ago
          2. automatic updates will trigger more frequent reboots - and are typically not a good idea in my humble opinion
    • Luffy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Please tell me which

      The only one I saw is Fedora, and that’s it. Even with something like Silver blue you can Live-apply the updates