<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 29 May 2012 15:59, <a href="mailto:david@gbenet.com">david@gbenet.com</a> <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:david@gbenet.com" target="_blank">david@gbenet.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im"><br></div>All major distros at one time had root login as a default. Opensuse still has it as does<br>
Linux Mint. So why suddenly have these distros thought "Oh blimey let's get rid of root so<br>
that end users can not dig into their systems!"<br></blockquote><div>This is a non sequitur, user can dig into their systems where the root account is disabled by default.</div><div>This seems to be just plain wrong as a assertion - many times over the last few weeks you have claimed it has been removed. It is disabled by default, you can re-enable it, this has been pointed out every time you make this claim. </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
When Linux was first introduced - everybody was allowed to play. That principle has lasted<br>
a good 12 to 15 years. Some distros have no apt-get in the file repositories. What if they<br>
decided not to include encryption? And to make matters worse not include it in their<br>
downloads? I think you would be upset by that - especially since gpg 1.4.11 in all its<br>
flavours has been installed as a default for many many years.<br></blockquote><div>I am guilty of not knowing or caring about the version of gpg - but you can build from source and maintain a repository of your own for Suse, Fedora and Ubuntu (and others I guess) as a service to the community, if you so choose.</div>
<div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
We are talking about principle here - who decides - what users can and can not do. What<br>
software they are allowed to install and so on. It is a slippery slope. I've already<br>
mentioned Seahorse - in the original package you can set the passphrase time - now that<br>
function has been edited out.#<br></blockquote><div>I remember using Suse to build from source 10 years ago, I don't want to go back to that method. The dependency issues sucked up too much time. I prefer the Ubuntu package management on the rare occasion that I have to build from source today. </div>
<div>Are you saying that you can't gain access to the source and add that functionality back, compile it and share it?</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Linux was once free and open source - even Ubuntu has changed to being a closed shop. The<br>
Ubuntu you have now is very very much different from the Ubuntu of 5 years ago. If your<br>
mind does not grasp the changes to your distro - what then?<br></blockquote><div> </div><div>The talk 10 years ago was about how linux would become main stream. Now that is has, you still have access to source based distros if you want <a href="http://www.gentoo.org/">http://www.gentoo.org/</a> </div>
<div>It seems that your issue is that there are flavours of Linux that just work and people can use them with out knowledge of the underlying software. I do not think that I have been diminished by this, in fact the increase in Linux user-base has greatly speeded up the provision of hardware drivers imo.</div>
<div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
I remember what Fedora was like 12 years ago. It is a different product now. Then it was<br>
like walking on thin or thick ice one was never quite sure when it would fail - but it<br>
would fail. Today Fedora is at least a bit more robust. That's all one can say about it.<br>
<br>
Ubuntu? Sharp and snappy open as it was in the past - now - a heavily branded Linux and a<br>
closed shop. Try and install the real version of Seahorse.</blockquote><div>Which version? I'll give it a go, just for the hell of it.</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
All your open source has been<br>
re-written for Ubuntu - at this goes for Fedora Opensuse and all the other major distros.<br>
Whereas in the past you installed real open source software - not a version that they who<br>
ever they are - think you will have.</blockquote><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
So for me Fedora-17 is just like Fedora-16 - with much fewer user options - much less<br>
choice in installable software - and all software re-written to fit in with Fedora. It<br>
will get to the point when only approved software can run on Fedora. Like Microsoft their<br>
software only runs on a Microsoft O/S without any backward compatibility. Fedora-17 is no<br>
different as are other Linux distros Ubuntu Opensuse.<br></blockquote><div>Do you have a published roadmap that supports your statements here? Recently I heard on radio 4 that Andriod was being criticised for being too open - in the context of vulnerability and it is the most locked down linux that I have used.</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
As I said I'd not waste my time burning a DVD on what is junk - to me. Others may praise<br>
and give it every first class rating shout from the roof tops how wonderful it is. People<br>
go from one release to the next with apparent mindless oblivion to the changes that are<br>
made to their Linux distro. Newcomers have no idea what came before.<br></blockquote><div>Take a look at Minix <a href="http://www.minix3.org/">http://www.minix3.org/</a></div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
But when you get to being over 60 have used Linux for 15 years or more - then you will<br>
have a little history. You will be aware of the changes. Perhaps in 30 years time people</blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
will be buying Linux with an end-user licence like Microsoft's. Who knows.<br></blockquote><div>I have that amount history now and more with other systems. I'm sure many others on this list do as well. No one else seems to support your position. </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im">
David<br>
<br>
- --<br>
“See the sanity of the man! No gods, no angels, no demons, no body. Nothing of the<br>
kind.Stern, sane,every brain-cell perfect and complete even at the moment of death. No<br>
delusion.” <a href="https://linuxcounter.net/user/512854.html" target="_blank">https://linuxcounter.net/user/512854.html</a> - <a href="http://gbenet.com" target="_blank">http://gbenet.com</a><br>
</div>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)<br>
<div class="im">Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - <a href="http://enigmail.mozdev.org/" target="_blank">http://enigmail.mozdev.org/</a><br>
<br>
</div>iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPxORXAAoJEOJpqm7flRExRRcH/RzGMrMH+FelOfYnKB/WZKJd<br>
xOvtDIFrNbAwEq8O+AgBTEa1HrmSOa6clH8Xy3LHjuhcTr0aEcKu1ixTL2bONaSp<br>
446TJsNMQuzvPBTqWBVbsjEBK+cyzQjXud8tky4osFuz+xHwywmqxDlImjIa779n<br>
VMXA9jbJnzjTuG6wRnhaOcn5zq4LhNb7elLr546QVi39xIWNlZK+bfW1g6l4Et6/<br>
doySYO1SGY6mvHNUBxynCcbREo5yyJLu6vsxvbyk7lKQVTLuox0Eyyb4SsqGHY1R<br>
jAfEMwBwBNGz4/tEtqyvNupbqVPxFlmhKawkasJMKmFQP2aeJJAJxr0X16UhxDA=<br>
=Wzle<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Nottingham mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Nottingham@mailman.lug.org.uk">Nottingham@mailman.lug.org.uk</a><br>
<a href="https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/nottingham" target="_blank">https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/nottingham</a></div></div></blockquote></div><br>