(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

Well I'm going to stick my neck out here to point out a couple of things. As a preface I'll say this “I run as root with Puppy

2byte wrote:
So there you have it, and let me sum up with this. If Puppy were to be changed so that I could not be root when need be or I had to sudo everything I wouldn't give it the time of day.
~

It's very simple to set up access to whatever you need with permissions. Then sudo gets used mainly when you're changing or removing things. My vim editor, for example, runs in read-only without sudo, which in an added feature, since there is no chance of accidentally changing code when I'm scrolling around or copying things.

jpeps wrote: It's very simple to set up access to whatever you need with permissions

Hi jpeps,
Are you talking about Puppy here? Which version? Sudo doesn't exist on 4.12 nor does pam.

If you could tells us how to easily (even not so easily) get Puppy to boot as a user other than root or spot with a specified user group, run Open Office and various other programs, log in to the server and read, create and edit files only in permitted directories then I am all ears. BTW having more than one user per machine isn't a requirement for our needs, if that makes any difference.

Seriously, can this be done? And if so are you willing to tell us how, or point us in the right direction?
~

Hi 2byte!

Actually, if you take and change the last 2 numbers of your current version around ( 4.1.2 ) to make "4.2.1" and then search for "Pizzasgood's 4.2.1 multiuser puppy", you'll have exactly what you're looking for me thinks!

Reason being: Back when 4.2.1 came out there was such a clamour for a multiuser Puppy, much like Nathan's "Grafpup-2.0.1" ( I believe it was? ) as he too had made a multiuser Puppy, that Pizzasgood decided to try the same - to please those that wanted one - plus to see how difficult it would be to take on such a project. He detailed a lot of his work in the thread he'd made ( sorry I can't recall it off the top of my head hence why I've said you'll need to do a search... ). Such work is NOT for the faint-hearted, trust me. Both Nathan AND Pizzasgood have stated so each time. If I recall correctly it's because the programmes now in Puppy have been compiled for single-user use and had to be completely recompiled...

I hope this has helped?

Cheers/Amicalement,

Eyes-Only
"L'Peau-Rouge"

Pizzasgood has told his story somewhere and it was real hard works for weeks upon weeks him having to forsaken family and all and it was very tiring too. So I doubt it ever will happen again that somebody take upon them to try. It is too tedious to do even if one are good at it.

But that is my poor memory. Search can find the original text

But that version is not using the later drivers so it fails to get internet on some modern computers so one would need to add good drivers to it.

http://puppylinuxnews.org/puplets/puppy421multiuseriso/

http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=47409

Hi eyes-only, nooby, bernie

Thanks for taking the time to offer advice. I have tried PG's multiuser 4.21 and it almost fits the bill. Problems with 4.21 unrelated to his work make it undesirable for us. The Xorg for one thing, plus a no longer supported and unfamiliar build system. I suppose it could be remastered, and maybe that will be the route taken. However, I am attempting to apply some of the things I am learning from his instructions to a 5.25 remake via EZ-Woof. Slow going.... My thinking for taking this route is that it's already pretty compatible with 10.04 LTS and the Linux apps we need could be obtained from 10.04 or directly from the developers, thus already multiuser friendly. Most of what needs changing in Puppy are the scripts and gtkdialog apps that use hard coded references to /root. Anyone who is a programmer knows that hard coded paths are a major mistake in any software. Anyway, my desire for a minimal Puppy with multiuser is for a work environment, and a good number of the built in Puppy specific apps are not needed nor desired.

I realize it may be an exercise in futility, but something in me always seems to say "take the road less traveled"
~

2byte wrote:

jpeps wrote: It's very simple to set up access to whatever you need with permissions

Hi jpeps,
Are you talking about Puppy here? Which version? Sudo doesn't exist on 4.12 nor does pam.

Seriously, can this be done? And if so are you willing to tell us how, or point us in the right direction?
~

I posted a build script in utilities a while back:
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 17&t=60258

It's simple to add additional groups or users; there's "adduser" and "addgroup". Spot, of course, is already set up.

Home directories are in /etc/passwd, and permissions set with chown.
If you want passwords, use "passwd [user]"

EDIT: I have an easy way of password protecting exiting back into root shell from user, if you need it.

jpeps wrote:BTW/ I once DID wipe out an entire partition with rm -r * accidentally. I think it was very late, and I thought I was inside a directory. It happens fairly quickly. It can also happen from within a script if something screws up. In that case, not being in root could really be a blessing.

If using pwd or ls is too much for you, you should consider editing your .bashrc to include your current working directory, I am very careful anyways, but i can see how software can blow up in your face. When i was experimenting with distros, i enabled compiz only to find out my graphics card could not handle it. My screen was filled with black and it restarts with compiz enabled. So looong distro! I think a regular account could not save you thereof. At least in my own situation.

If using pwd or ls is too much for you

Do not underestimate the unreasonable capacities of some users . . .
http://clientsfromhell.net/post/4963761 ... -client-is

SimpleWater wrote:

jpeps wrote:BTW/ I once DID wipe out an entire partition with rm -r * accidentally. I think it was very late, and I thought I was inside a directory. It happens fairly quickly. It can also happen from within a script if something screws up. In that case, not being in root could really be a blessing.

If using pwd or ls is too much for you, you should consider editing your .bashrc to include your current working directory,

It happened from within a script I was testing. When doing a lot of programing, the chances of screwing things up increases substantially.

Lobster wrote:

If using pwd or ls is too much for you

Do not underestimate the unreasonable capacities of some users . . .
http://clientsfromhell.net/post/4963761 ... -client-is

sounds like my parents

jpeps, just try and be careful. I have yet to see how it can happen, but then again i have a hard time relating since i know little about programming.

SimpleWater wrote:
jpeps, just try and be careful. I have yet to see how it can happen, but then again i have a hard time relating since i know little about programming.

Linux has evolved via many thousands of users over the years, and there's a reason for most things, such as use of permissions, read-only options, etc., that may not be immediately transparent. Having the correct tools available is precisely the way to "be careful"....that's the point.

Hail a holy war!
I agree that if you're programming then there is much more possibilities for you to break the system down. The closer you are to ring0 the closer system crash is. It's mostly about drivers only, but even ring3 progz can hardly damage the system in test runs if being improperly designed.
As for me, I never run as Administrator@Win* or root@*nix if it is not really required. Especially in Windows.
Puppy is running under root by default and there is not much possibly damage if things would go wrong here - it's entirely in RAM, so I don't mean. But if system is on hdd then being a non-root becomes very actual.

And Yes, I really believe that I personally never type a command that will kill my system in command prompt,
.. but I really can't know what will do the prog that I run first time if it is written by somebody else, not me!