splay):
9. Type "add" and then paste the line you copied from step 4
10. Type "exit" command from xauth
11. Firefox should now be able to use the display, and your addition is
persistent
oughh.. It turns out that
export XAUTHORITY=...
is redundant and I had it in .bash_prof
On 1/11/22 11:54, C Linus Hicks wrote:
Making some assumptions about your requirements:
1. Make sure xauth is installed
2. Your DISPLAY environment variable is likely: ":0" - just verify it is set
3. Run the command: "xauth list"
4. Copy the line that has "/unix:", all three parts
5. Use su - or
the line you copied from step 4
10. Type "exit" command from xauth
11. Firefox should now be able to use the display, and your addition is
persistent
oughh.. It turns out that
export XAUTHORITY=...
is redundant and I had it in .bash_profile of my 'regular',
sudo/su f
Hi L,
> How do you get your Firefox to run/work with different user?
> I'm thinking obvious - sudo, su - kind of 'runas' with
> windows OS.
Seeing as no-one has said this, yet:
*** Running things as root is ill-advised. ***
While running a file manager as root to
For root run GUI apps in KDE, I use kdesu.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
L
t;exit" command from xauth
11. Firefox should now be able to use the display, and your addition is
persistent
On Tue, 2022-01-11 at 17:23 +, lejeczek via users wrote:
> Hi guys.
>
> How do you get your Firefox to run/work with different user?
> I'm thi
On 1/11/22 10:32 AM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
Kludge I have used for some apps, notably my file browser to run as root
is to:
in Terminal su -
run app from prompt with & to release it from Terminal.
Kind of works.
I use Xfce and have this one liner to run Thunar as root:
beesu - thunar
Thi
On 11/01/2022 17:32, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
On 1/11/22 12:23, lejeczek via users wrote:
Hi guys.
How do you get your Firefox to run/work with different user?
I'm thinking obvious - sudo, su - kind of 'runas' with
windows OS.
Kludge I have used for some apps, notably my f
On 1/11/22 12:23, lejeczek via users wrote:
Hi guys.
How do you get your Firefox to run/work with different user?
I'm thinking obvious - sudo, su - kind of 'runas' with windows OS.
Kludge I have used for some apps, notably my file browser to run as root
is to:
in Termina
Hi guys.
How do you get your Firefox to run/work with different user?
I'm thinking obvious - sudo, su - kind of 'runas' with
windows OS.
many thanks, L
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an em
On 05/29/2017 12:17 PM, fred roller wrote:
>
>> On 05/27/2017 10:12 PM, fred roller wrote:
>>> you could run "who" to see if the root user is still logged
> on as well.
>>
>> I have a terminal open, logged in as root with su -. When I
> ran who, it
>> just showed me, logged in once and no root.
> On 05/27/2017 10:12 PM, fred roller wrote:
>> you could run "who" to see if the root user is still logged
on as well.
>
> I have a terminal open, logged in as root with su -. When I
ran who, it
> just showed me, logged in once and no root. Checking with
uptime, it
> shows one user.
I never hea
On 05/28/2017 01:04 AM, Tom H wrote:
On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 10:05 PM, Tom Horsley wrote:
Nope, completely myth, and here's why: "sudo su -l" is absolutely
the fastest and most efficient way to get a root login shell
where the PATH is set correctly
"-i" is faster
Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Sat, 27 May 2017 21:36:29 -0600
> Peter Gueckel wrote:
>
>> Now, I wonder about $PATH: what is the correct value "to
find the
>> programs that root needs"?
>
> Well, root tends to have /sbin which "normal" users don't
> have by default. There may be others, also there ca
On 28 May 2017 at 15:16, Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Sat, 27 May 2017 21:36:29 -0600
> Peter Gueckel wrote:
>
>> Now, I wonder about $PATH: what is the correct value "to find the
>> programs that root needs"?
>
> Well, root tends to have /sbin which "normal" users don't
> have by default.
That's not
Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 05/27/2017 10:12 PM, fred roller wrote:
>> you could run "who" to see if the root user is still logged
on as well.
>
> I have a terminal open, logged in as root with su -. When I
ran who, it
> just showed me, logged in once and no root. Checking with
uptime, it
> shows o
On Sat, 27 May 2017 21:36:29 -0600
Peter Gueckel wrote:
> Now, I wonder about $PATH: what is the correct value "to find the
> programs that root needs"?
Well, root tends to have /sbin which "normal" users don't
have by default. There may be others, also there can be
aliases and such in root's .b
On Sun, May 28, 2017 at 5:24 AM, Paul Allen Newell wrote:
>
> Correcting my off-list post by cc-ing back to the list ... once again, my
> apologies
No harm done, no apologies necessary :)
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubs
On 05/28/2017 02:21 AM, Paul Allen Newell wrote:
On 05/28/2017 01:40 AM, Tom H wrote:
You replied off-list
On Sun, May 28, 2017 at 4:16 AM, Paul Allen Newell
wrote:
On 05/28/2017 01:04 AM, Tom H wrote:
"-i" is faster than "su -l" :)
huh?
sudo -i
is faster than
su
On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 10:05 PM, Tom Horsley wrote:
>
> Nope, completely myth, and here's why: "sudo su -l" is absolutely
> the fastest and most efficient way to get a root login shell
> where the PATH is set correctly
On 05/27/2017 10:12 PM, fred roller wrote:
you could run "who" to see if the root user is still logged on as well.
I have a terminal open, logged in as root with su -. When I ran who, it
just showed me, logged in once and no root. Checking with uptime, it
shows one user.
__
On 05/27/2017 08:36 PM, Peter Gueckel wrote:
Now, I wonder about $PATH: what is the correct value "to find the
programs that root needs"?
Here's root's path on my box:
/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/root/bin
___
users mailing list
On 27May2017 21:36, Peter Gueckel wrote:
OK, thanks, guys. I was just curious.
Well, closing a terminal emulator should normally sent SIGHUP to processes
still on the terminal. Which may or may not exit (most will). And then there's
job control and "disown"ed jobs (things you've asked to con
you could run "who" to see if the root user is still logged on as well.
On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 11:36 PM, Peter Gueckel wrote:
> OK, thanks, guys. I was just curious.
>
> Yes, I do have my system set up not to require the password for
> sudo. It is faster than constantly having to type it, time
OK, thanks, guys. I was just curious.
Yes, I do have my system set up not to require the password for
sudo. It is faster than constantly having to type it, time and
again. System installation is hell without it ;-)
Now, I wonder about $PATH: what is the correct value "to find the
programs that
On 05/27/2017 07:05 PM, Tom Horsley wrote:
On Sat, 27 May 2017 18:48:06 -0700
Joe Zeff wrote:
First, running sudo su is redundant if you know the root password, as I
presume you do. (It's your system, you installed it and assigned the
root password.) In fact, the only reason to use su
On Sat, 27 May 2017 18:48:06 -0700
Joe Zeff wrote:
> First, running sudo su is redundant if you know the root password, as I
> presume you do. (It's your system, you installed it and assigned the
> root password.) In fact, the only reason to use sudo at all is if you
> do
On 05/27/2017 06:09 PM, Peter Gueckel wrote:
I opened a second tab in konsole and immediately ran sudo su to
obtain a prompt as root. I ran a program and then I forgot to
exit and just closed the tab. Am I still root somewhere? Or did
closing the tab do the same thing as a proper exit?
First
On Sat, 27 May 2017 19:09:59 -0600
Peter Gueckel wrote:
> I opened a second tab in konsole and immediately ran sudo su to
> obtain a prompt as root. I ran a program and then I forgot to
> exit and just closed the tab. Am I still root somewhere? Or did
> closing the tab do the sam
I opened a second tab in konsole and immediately ran sudo su to
obtain a prompt as root. I ran a program and then I forgot to
exit and just closed the tab. Am I still root somewhere? Or did
closing the tab do the same thing as a proper exit?
___
users
On Tue, 2010-10-26 at 18:02 +1030, Tim wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-10-25 at 19:34 -0700, James McKenzie wrote:
> > You cannot cure or eliminate stupid
>
> Yes, intelligence has it's limits, but stupidity knows no bounds.
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm
not s
On Mon, 2010-10-25 at 19:34 -0700, James McKenzie wrote:
> You cannot cure or eliminate stupid
Yes, intelligence has it's limits, but stupidity knows no bounds.
--
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.
--
users mailing
On 10/18/10 3:09 PM, Tim wrote:
> Over the years I've tried Red Hat Linux, Fedora, CentOS, one of the
> BSDs, DeliLinux, Mandrake, Suse, Caldera, and Ubuntu. Might have forget
> one or two more. None of them did.
>
Most modern UNIX/Linux Distros default to /root or /home/root. However,
users ar
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 11:55 AM, Todd Zullinger wrote:
> Tom H wrote:
>> "sudo -i" = "sudo su -"
>
> Just a minor nit, they're not entirely equivalent. Not all
> environmental vars are reset. PS1 is one that I noticed. (Like I
> said, a minor
Tom H wrote:
> "sudo -i" = "sudo su -"
Just a minor nit, they're not entirely equivalent. Not all
environmental vars are reset. PS1 is one that I noticed. (Like I
said, a minor nit. ;)
--
ToddOpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 9:49 AM, James Mckenzie
wrote:
> Tomas Hajek wrote:
>>I have to disagree with "sudo su - is stupid."
> Given all of the information in this thread and rethinking my position, I
> have to agree.
> You can block this if needed in the sudo
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 9:20 AM, Tomas Hajek wrote:
>
> I suppose if "sudo su -" asks for roots password ("Defaults targetpw" in
> sudoers for
> instance) like opensuse seems to do, I might consider that stupid but it
> probably is
> there for a reason
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 8:22 AM, Craig White wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 10:05 -0600, Petrus de Calguarium wrote:
>> When I need root access, I used to use sudo su -. Recently, I discovered I
>> could simply type su -.
>>
>> What's the difference:
>>
&g
Tomas Hajek wrote:
(BTW, I know that I'm breaking threads, don't complain to me, complain to
Earthlink.)
>
>I have to disagree with "sudo su - is stupid."
>
Given all of the information in this thread and rethinking my position, I have
to agree. You can block this
I have to disagree with "sudo su - is stupid."
If it serves a purpose (as it does for me and others I work with) then I don't
see it as being stupid.
Can I use "su -", sure I can but then I have to remember roots password (do I
know it yes, am I allowed to work a
Hmm, I think
$ sudo -i
and your account password will give you root access on Ubuntu. On Debian
sudo is not allowed by default.
$ sudo su -
is stupid.
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 3:22 PM, Craig White wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 10:05 -0600, Petrus de Calguarium wrote:
> > When I
On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 10:05 -0600, Petrus de Calguarium wrote:
> When I need root access, I used to use sudo su -. Recently, I discovered I
> could simply type su -.
>
> What's the difference:
>
> su -
> sudo su -
>
I can't imagine why any UNIX/Linux syst
On 10/18/10 2:13 PM, Tim wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 09:40 -0700, James Mckenzie wrote:
>> Also root's home directory should NEVER be / (root) but rather
>> something like /home/root.
> Wrong. Bad advice. The following somewhat mitigates that, but you've
> muddied the water with bad advice i
Once upon a time, Patrick O'Callaghan said:
> Back in the mists of time when men were men and dinosaurs roamed the
> Earth, the home directory for "root" was indeed "/", but of course I'm
> talking about Unix, not Linux.
Heh, I just turned off one such system last month (one more to go)!
--
Chri
On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 18:20 -0400, Tom H wrote:
> > Also root's home directory should NEVER be / (root) but rather
> something like /home/root.
> > I've known of several folks who 'forgot' they were root or had
> either sudo'd or su -'d and
> > then issued the famous (or infamous) rm -rf * wiping o
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 12:40 PM, James Mckenzie
wrote:
> Also root's home directory should NEVER be / (root) but rather something like
> /home/root.
> I've known of several folks who 'forgot' they were root or had either sudo'd
>or su -'d and
> then issued the famous (or infamous) rm -rf * wip
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 9:09 AM, Tim wrote:
>
>> Most folks just install using the defaults and some systems default to
>> root's home being the base root directory and not /root or /home/root.
>
> I've never seen that, what distro does that? Geez, what a bad idea!
>
Maybe a busybox based initra
James Mckenzie:
> I did not state /root but rather the base root directory '/'.
> Anything else would be ok in my book from a security standpoint.
Sorry, I misread your prior post. I don't know why I didn't notice the
brackets where you wrote: / (root)
> Most folks just install using the defaul
Tim wrote:
>Sent: Oct 18, 2010 2:13 PM
>To: James Mckenzie , Community support for Fedora
>users
>Subject: Re: su or sudo su?
>
>On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 09:40 -0700, James Mckenzie wrote:
>> Also root's home directory should NEVER be / (root) but rather
>>
On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 09:40 -0700, James Mckenzie wrote:
> Also root's home directory should NEVER be / (root) but rather
> something like /home/root.
Wrong. Bad advice. The following somewhat mitigates that, but you've
muddied the water with bad advice in the first place.
> I've known of sever
suvayu ali wrote:
>Sent: Oct 18, 2010 12:30 PM
>To: James Mckenzie , Community support for Fedora
>users
>Subject: Re: su or sudo su?
>
>Hi James and Patrick,
>
>On 18 October 2010 09:40, James Mckenzie wrote:
>> Suvayu Ali wrote:
>>>I am not sure how
On 10/18/2010 02:30 PM, suvayu ali wrote:
> Hi James and Patrick,
>
> On 18 October 2010 09:40, James Mckenzie wrote:
>> Suvayu Ali wrote:
>>> I am not sure how it is insecure, could you elaborate? At least to me
>>> giving (limited/full) root privileges to an ordinary user seems a lot
>>> more
Hi James and Patrick,
On 18 October 2010 09:40, James Mckenzie wrote:
> Suvayu Ali wrote:
>>I am not sure how it is insecure, could you elaborate? At least to me
>>giving (limited/full) root privileges to an ordinary user seems a lot
>>more risky.
>
> Which is what you are doing with the file be
wrote:
> ...
Thanks, guys. I now understand the difference.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
On 10/18/10 12:01 PM, Suvayu Ali wrote:
> On Monday 18 October 2010 09:15 AM, James Mckenzie wrote:
>> su - exposes the root password and is generally discouraged. sudo
>> does not but exposes which users have this privilege. Logins
>> through unsecured means should be disabled or very closely
Suvayu Ali wrote:
>
>On Monday 18 October 2010 09:15 AM, James Mckenzie wrote:
>> su - exposes the root password and is generally discouraged. sudo
>> does not but exposes which users have this privilege. Logins
>> through unsecured means should be disabled or very closely
>> controlled. Most S
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Petrus de Calguarium
wrote:
>
> When I need root access, I used to use sudo su -. Recently, I discovered I
> could simply type su -.
>
> What's the difference:
>
> su -
> sudo su -
When you use "sudo su -", you have to t
Todd Zullinger wrote:
>
>James Mckenzie wrote:
>> Petrus de Calguarium wrote:
>>>
>>>When I need root access, I used to use sudo su -.
>>
>> This is plain wrong. The command should be sudo .
>
>And su - is a command. ;)
But this is, in most ca
On Monday 18 October 2010 09:15 AM, James Mckenzie wrote:
> su - exposes the root password and is generally discouraged. sudo
> does not but exposes which users have this privilege. Logins
> through unsecured means should be disabled or very closely
> controlled. Most SAs now disable or remove u
On 10/18/2010 12:05 PM, Petrus de Calguarium wrote:
> When I need root access, I used to use sudo su -. Recently, I discovered I
> could simply type su -.
>
> What's the difference:
>
> su -
> sudo su -
The answer depends on how you configure your sudo. The diffe
James Mckenzie wrote:
> Petrus de Calguarium wrote:
>>
>>When I need root access, I used to use sudo su -.
>
> This is plain wrong. The command should be sudo .
And su - is a command. ;)
There's really nothing wrong with that command from a technical
standpoint.
W
Petrus de Calguarium wrote:
>
>When I need root access, I used to use sudo su -.
This is plain wrong. The command should be sudo .
>Recently, I discovered I >could simply type su -.
>
>What's the difference:
Passwords and what is recorded in your log files. If you use
When I need root access, I used to use sudo su -. Recently, I discovered I
could simply type su -.
What's the difference:
su -
sudo su -
?
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/
63 matches
Mail list logo
