Who's in charge?
-
No, but this time the owner knows why it doesn't work. Big difference in IT.
Is the power cable connected? No? Okay plug it in, then turn it off and back on again.
-
This post did not contain any content.
sudo chown <username> <file>chmod 700 <file>Don’t see a problem
/s -
You can install firefox via cli like powershell.
winget install Mozilla.FirefoxFirst command I run on any new Windows install
-
I prefer to run subatomic Linux
Disk block cryptographic signatures with automatic recovery?
-
But webview constantly reinstalls itself.
-
Would the genie get stuck in an endless loop, trying to find the owner of the three wishes for wish 2?
Fortunately the wisher is indistinguishable from a behavioral perspective of a P-Zombie, so they can still make wishes
-
This post did not contain any content.
idk tf chown does, use sudo instead. im not going to read
man chowneither.sudo su # do shenanigans in the cli/tui. gui is for noobs # nvim, ls, touch, stroke, tease, rm -
idk tf chown does, use sudo instead. im not going to read
man chowneither.sudo su # do shenanigans in the cli/tui. gui is for noobs # nvim, ls, touch, stroke, tease, rmSo I'm not the best at this, but this is my best guess (I have no experience in sysadmin, as I've only ever been the sole user of my PC and prefer not to network anything).
Owner #1, smackyboi, has ownership of a file called
smutgame.AppImage. This means they can choose who accesses smutgame, if it can execute, if it can be read or written by certain groups, etc.Owner #2, luvurealgood, on the system via their own account (or networked computer in the case of server storage) can't change these settings unless smackyboi says they could, because they're the owner and can add luvurealgood to the admin group for the file if they want. Smackyboi suddenly writes,
sudo chown luvurealgood smutgame.AppImage.Now luvurealgood owns that file and can make every change they want to it, including removing smackyboi from accessing it, as they're no longer the owner. They can lock down the file and forbid it from being executed, etc etc. I believe anyone who is in the admin group of that file can do anything to it as well, except change it's ownership if its already owned.
This is just from pieces of info and my tiny experience in Windows sysadmin shenanigans. Someone swoop in and correct me if I got anything wrong.
-
I don't know what's the hate with edge, it works wonderfully for an average user, it's fully configurable with add-ons and handles security policies really well
The AI integration might be a bit over the top but nothing you can't disable in your side
Really I don't see why you guys pile on so much on it
Because it’s my fucking computer and I shouldn’t have to edit the registry to uninstall a program I don’t use.
After every update it’s also reset to my default browser which is infuriating
-
That's a weird stance to take since the discussion was about file permissions, and there are absolutely ways around Windows protecting system files just like there are ways around Linux doing the same thing.
There are many reasons to criticize Microsoft, but making it difficult for users to fuck up system files isn't one of them. Most users are of the "it's a box filled with magic smoke" variety, and they need to be protected from themselves.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Oh we absolutely can throw shade at MS when they use the very same schemes to install "features" you cannot turn off or applications you cannot uninstall.
FUCK MS for deciding what invasive spyware-I-mean-features to turn on with no recourse for the average user.
-
With arch+xfce4 I mostly don't. Except for when I do systemctl reload <service> in a cli without sudo and it pops a surprise elevation password request gui in my face. I haven't figured out what makes it behave like that.
I use Arch btw
🧐 eats boogerwrote on last edited by [email protected]That’s the result of polkit (policy kit) authentication agents. These are typically DE-specific for their GUIs.
pkexec is comparable to sudo and can be used from the terminal to get the graphical prompt for elevated commands.
-
Is there a technical reason that Linux apps can't/don't just pop up an authenticator thing asking for more privileges like Windows apps can do? Why does nano just say that the file is unwriteable instead of letting me increase the privileges?
Linux apps follow simplicity principles. If you don't have permission to delete a file, why assume you may know the password of the user who has permission?
You can preface
sudoto any command to execute it with root privileges, which would be similar to running as admin in windows.Graphical apps do tend to ask for authentication if it makes sense. No userland apps should need more permissions than the current user's in order to run.
-
Microsoft's monopoly and their for-profit anti-consumer practices is what's wrong with it. Their history says they cannot be trusted. I'd ask myself why they need a browser in the first place.
Yup. As someone who lived through the internet explorer dark ages, I'm not eager for google and or Microsoft to have complete dominance
-
Glad to see another voice of sanity regarding Windows.
If you haven't learned by now, on Lemmy the only valid option for dealing with Windows configuration and basic Windows admin tasks is to yeet Windows and go to Linux.
Sometimes one wants to access a file without making changes though. Escalating privileges is the answer in this scenario and windows doesn't make that as easy,as it doesn't really want to you act as SYSTEM
-
Edge is the best browser for downloading much better browsers lol
Best Chromium browser*
-
I don't know what's the hate with edge, it works wonderfully for an average user, it's fully configurable with add-ons and handles security policies really well
The AI integration might be a bit over the top but nothing you can't disable in your side
Really I don't see why you guys pile on so much on it
It uses chromium which people shouldn’t use
-
Then you sudo chmod. Windows I have to do weird shit with the properties context menu. And even that sometimes doesn't work. I run commands in powershell as Administrator. Still doesn't work.
Fuck Windows.
That’s just because Linux is designed for end users so everything is intuitive and easy. Windows is designed for tech nerds that like digging through pages to make anything work
-
With arch+xfce4 I mostly don't. Except for when I do systemctl reload <service> in a cli without sudo and it pops a surprise elevation password request gui in my face. I haven't figured out what makes it behave like that.
I use Arch btw
🧐 eats boogerYeah, when I was on xfce on Arch I remember going into some places in the file manager where it wouldn't let me edit files etc without running it from the terminal through sudo.
-
Some do. I'm sure it is possible with terminal programs. In KDE, you do get authenticator pop-ups.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Hmm I just tried editing some systemd service with Kate and it did actually give me an authenticator popup when I tried to save it
Although then the prompt expired and now it does nothing when I try to save it. Restarted Kate and now it works again...
I haven't tried that before
When I try to go into the sudoers.d folder tho it just says I can't, and the same thing happens when I try to open the sudoers file in Kate. If I try to copy and paste a systemd service in dolphin tho it just says I don't have permission and doesn't give a prompt.
lol if I open it with nano through sudo it says 'sudoers is meant to be read only'
-
Is there a technical reason that Linux apps can't/don't just pop up an authenticator thing asking for more privileges like Windows apps can do? Why does nano just say that the file is unwriteable instead of letting me increase the privileges?
The GUI apps do (depends on your DE). Terminal apps like nano are designed to work without fancy desktop stuff, like Polkit. Any sort of graphical text editor should prompt you for your password.
systemctlstill asks for a password, though. Because it's systemd, and it's part of everything.
