Distrowatch review 30 August

News, happenings
Message
Author
nooby
Posts: 10369
Joined: Sun 29 Jun 2008, 19:05
Location: SwedenEurope

#21 Post by nooby »

Paul wrote:Since every reviewer ALWAYS complains about this, it might be a good selling point to put in the option of running conventionally, some easy setup switcher ...
so they have nothing more to complain about -

EVEN IF there is nothing wrong with running a desktop distro as root.
I think Paul have a very good argument and it should be easy to go root in a safe way for those of us that want to.

I tested an ubuntu variant the other day and me had no idea to read the HDD. I searched for it more than ten minutes to half an hour and had to give up on it.

But what Paul writes here
(Pizzasgood already did all the work)

That only worked for a special older version? Puppy 4.2.1 or something?

Did that one really work with 431 or Lupu 511?


so it would be cool if someone good at doing programming made a version that every reviewer and user felt at home with.

I love Frugal so it would be really sad that that was abandoned.

I have not read Barry's text today because I did not knew about it so thanks for reminding me to read his blog now and then.

I've read Barry's blog entry now and agree that it is a problem there if one upgrade.

I guess it show how far behind me is. I am the residental Noob.

I never upgrade ever. I download the latest version and start all over.

I have put Mozilla outside of pupsave and that way I can keep email in Seamonkey and bookmarks in FF and don't have to start all over with them.

That way an "iso upgrade" goes smooth.

Usual upgrades I never do. But I always try to use one of the latest .iso but have been lazy last months.
I use Google Search on Puppy Forum
not an ideal solution though

Shep
Posts: 878
Joined: Sat 08 Nov 2008, 07:55
Location: Australia

#22 Post by Shep »

Sage wrote:Otherwise, I agree - root is absolutely no problem;
The one time I've struck problems running as root, was when I believed I had write-protected a file so I couldn't accidently absentmindedly edit it (I intend to always make a copy and edit the copy).

Guess what I discovered! chmod -w means zip when you're root. :x :x :x

I can't let the opportunity go by: is there no way to generally make a file read-only by root? (Apart from putting it on a CD, etc. :roll: :roll: )

Post Reply