Hi!
Has anyone updated *system-config-users-1.2.39-0.fc4.1* recently and found that adding new groups do not work anymore? The add new users work just fine... but I can't seem to create AND edit groups. It just showed a grey out box with a busy cursor all the time.
Or am I the only one with this problem? ... sigh ...
I would appreciate any response. Thanks.
Yes, it's happening to me too and I'm having thoughts about switching to another distribution.
Yeaw Chu Lee wrote:
Hi!
Has anyone updated *system-config-users-1.2.39-0.fc4.1* recently and found that adding new groups do not work anymore? The add new users work just fine... but I can't seem to create AND edit groups. It just showed a grey out box with a busy cursor all the time.
Or am I the only one with this problem? ... sigh ...
I would appreciate any response. Thanks.
On Sun, Oct 02, 2005 at 09:18:45PM +0800, "國產 Wei-Yee Chan (Made in Chinar)" wrote:
Yes, it's happening to me too and I'm having thoughts about switching to another distribution.
Yeaw Chu Lee wrote:
That seems rather extreme reaction since: 1, If it is reported to bugzilla it can be fixed. 2, The 1.2.38-0 version works , 3. Adding a group is so easy to do by command line processing.
Hi!
Has anyone updated *system-config-users-1.2.39-0.fc4.1* recently and found that adding new groups do not work anymore? The add new users work just fine... but I can't seem to create AND edit groups. It just showed a grey out box with a busy cursor all the time.
Or am I the only one with this problem? ... sigh ...
I would appreciate any response. Thanks.
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Perhaps so, but not if U consider the frequency of packages breaking people's systems appears to be on the rise. I know that they can usually fix the bug within a week or less, but it's the practice of releasing buggy updates that annoys me.
akonstam@trinity.edu wrote:
On Sun, Oct 02, 2005 at 09:18:45PM +0800, "國產 Wei-Yee Chan (Made in Chinar)" wrote:
Yes, it's happening to me too and I'm having thoughts about switching to another distribution.
Yeaw Chu Lee wrote:
That seems rather extreme reaction since: 1, If it is reported to bugzilla it can be fixed. 2, The 1.2.38-0 version works , 3. Adding a group is so easy to do by command line processing.
On Sun, 2005-10-02 at 08:19 -0500, akonstam@trinity.edu wrote:
On Sun, Oct 02, 2005 at 09:18:45PM +0800, "國產 Wei-Yee Chan (Made in Chinar)" wrote:
Yes, it's happening to me too and I'm having thoughts about switching to another distribution.
Yeaw Chu Lee wrote:
That seems rather extreme reaction since: 1, If it is reported to bugzilla it can be fixed. 2, The 1.2.38-0 version works , 3. Adding a group is so easy to do by command line processing.
I agree with all of these, but #3 is hard to do for those who are intimidated or otherwise petrified by the thought of using a command line interface. This may be because they don't like to, have never needed to, or refuse to, but it still applies.
So many users are limited to using gui tools and the often restricted functionality of them that it scares me.
Hi!
Has anyone updated *system-config-users-1.2.39-0.fc4.1* recently and found that adding new groups do not work anymore? The add new users work just fine... but I can't seem to create AND edit groups. It just showed a grey out box with a busy cursor all the time.
Or am I the only one with this problem? ... sigh ...
I would appreciate any response. Thanks.
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
--
======================================================================= Beware of the Turing Tar-pit in which everything is possible but nothing of interest is easy.
Aaron Konstam Computer Science Trinity University telephone: (210)-999-7484
On Sun, 2005-10-02 at 08:18, "國產 Wei-Yee Chan (Made in Chinar)" wrote:
Yes, it's happening to me too and I'm having thoughts about switching to another distribution.
If you don't like running the very latest code with all the tradeoffs that implies, you might like the free Centos4 distribution which is rebuilt from the RHEL sources. It is similar in program versions to what was in fedora FC3 so it's not a big change for fedora users.
But, you don't get the latest desktop apps either.
One of the reasons why Windoze users are so hesitant about switching to Linux is that they fear having to use the command line. If Linux is to win users over, it'd have to go the GUI way. Let me tell U a story. More than ten years ago, I was using WordPerfect 5.0 and a uni mate was using MS Word. I thought that I was smarter as WordPerfect was much harder use, whereas MS Word was merely a matter of point-and-click. The fact is, my uni mate could churn out a piece of work in a fraction of the time that I could, even though she was what we called, a "computer illiterate".
Personally, I think that doing things the GUI way is more efficient. There's this package that I use everyday that requires me to compile a source rpm everytime I upgrade the kernel, and anytime I need to use it, I have to key in a very long command. Now, wouldn't a GUI version be simpler and more efficient for the user?
Jeff Vian wrote:
That seems rather extreme reaction since: 1, If it is reported to bugzilla it can be fixed. 2, The 1.2.38-0 version works , 3. Adding a group is so easy to do by command line processing.
I agree with all of these, but #3 is hard to do for those who are intimidated or otherwise petrified by the thought of using a command line interface. This may be because they don't like to, have never needed to, or refuse to, but it still applies.
So many users are limited to using gui tools and the often restricted functionality of them that it scares me.
Actually, I'm thinking along the line of stability. Debian is on my mind.
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Sun, 2005-10-02 at 08:18, "國產 Wei-Yee Chan (Made in Chinar)" wrote:
Yes, it's happening to me too and I'm having thoughts about switching to another distribution.
If you don't like running the very latest code with all the tradeoffs that implies, you might like the free Centos4 distribution which is rebuilt from the RHEL sources. It is similar in program versions to what was in fedora FC3 so it's not a big change for fedora users.
But, you don't get the latest desktop apps either.
On Mon, 2005-10-03 at 15:58 +0800, "國產 Wei-Yee Chan (Made in Chinar)" wrote:
One of the reasons why Windoze users are so hesitant about switching to Linux is that they fear having to use the command line. If Linux is to win users over, it'd have to go the GUI way. Let me tell U a story. More than ten years ago, I was using WordPerfect 5.0 and a uni mate was using MS Word. I thought that I was smarter as WordPerfect was much harder use, whereas MS Word was merely a matter of point-and-click. The fact is, my uni mate could churn out a piece of work in a fraction of the time that I could, even though she was what we called, a "computer illiterate".
Personally, I think that doing things the GUI way is more efficient. There's this package that I use everyday that requires me to compile a source rpm everytime I upgrade the kernel, and anytime I need to use it, I have to key in a very long command. Now, wouldn't a GUI version be simpler and more efficient for the user?
Point taken
However I feel like I have to point out that there are drawbacks to a GUI interface, sometimes it can be ~~too~~ easy to do something unintended. I'll give you an example:
Contrast MySQL, command line, with MSSQL, GUI
I had a friend who decided to rename a table in MSSQL. So he right clicked on the table name, and went down to rename on the context menu. His fingers glitched, and he clicked on the item above rename which happened to be delete, table was gone. Had he not had a backup, it would have been ugly.
Had he been working in MySQL from the command like, I do not think he would have made the same mistake. Its hard to type DROP TABLE, when you mean RENAME TABLE.
Food for thought
Micheal
Very true. For instance, I frequently have Windoze users unintentionally move their mice and then files would go missing. The GUI can be a double-edge sword, but I suppose the benefits it brings more than outweigh the costs.
micheal wrote:
Point taken
However I feel like I have to point out that there are drawbacks to a GUI interface, sometimes it can be ~~too~~ easy to do something unintended. I'll give you an example:
Contrast MySQL, command line, with MSSQL, GUI
I had a friend who decided to rename a table in MSSQL. So he right clicked on the table name, and went down to rename on the context menu. His fingers glitched, and he clicked on the item above rename which happened to be delete, table was gone. Had he not had a backup, it would have been ugly.
Had he been working in MySQL from the command like, I do not think he would have made the same mistake. Its hard to type DROP TABLE, when you mean RENAME TABLE.
Food for thought
Micheal
On Mon, 2005-10-03 at 03:00, "國產 Wei-Yee Chan (Made in Chinar)" wrote:
Actually, I'm thinking along the line of stability. Debian is on my mind.
I'd recommend Centos for that as well. It is built from the same source RPMs used in Red Hat Enterprise Linux, which is almost the same as has gone through extensive real-world use in fedora. I've never quite been able to figure out the release schedule for Debian if there is one an it seemed like you had to run a mix of stuff from their unstable repository to stay current. Maybe Ubuntu will change that, although they are too new to have much of a track record on updates.
On Mon, 2005-10-03 at 02:58, "國產 Wei-Yee Chan (Made in Chinar)" wrote:
Personally, I think that doing things the GUI way is more efficient. There's this package that I use everyday that requires me to compile a source rpm everytime I upgrade the kernel, and anytime I need to use it, I have to key in a very long command. Now, wouldn't a GUI version be simpler and more efficient for the user?
Actually, executing complicated commands repeatedly is where the command line wins, especially complicated sequences that no GUI programmer anticipated. All you have to do is type the command sequence into a file, give it a short name and type the short name every time you want to run the script. That is, at the shell level, every command you can run from the keyboard is automatically the same thing you would execute from a file in a script. If there are a few variables between runs, the shell provides adequate methods to accept and substitute them into the script. GUI's on the other hand often have no scripting mechanism at all, so you have to sit and wait and watch for the right time to punch the mouse. And when they do offer scripting each re-invents it with some new bizarre syntax that doesn't interoperate with anything else, while the unix shell has worked the same way for 30 years or so. If you are drawing pictures, a GUI makes sense. To give commands to a program, it doesn't.
On Mon, 2005-10-03 at 15:58 +0800, "國產 Wei-Yee Chan (Made in Chinar)" wrote:
One of the reasons why Windoze users are so hesitant about switching to Linux is that they fear having to use the command line. If Linux is to win users over, it'd have to go the GUI way. Let me tell U a story. More than ten years ago, I was using WordPerfect 5.0 and a uni mate was using MS Word. I thought that I was smarter as WordPerfect was much harder use, whereas MS Word was merely a matter of point-and-click. The fact is, my uni mate could churn out a piece of work in a fraction of the time that I could, even though she was what we called, a "computer illiterate".
Personally, I think that doing things the GUI way is more efficient. There's this package that I use everyday that requires me to compile a source rpm everytime I upgrade the kernel, and anytime I need to use it, I have to key in a very long command. Now, wouldn't a GUI version be simpler and more efficient for the user?
---- The problems with your assumptions are:
Linux isn't interested in obtaining wholesale switchovers from Windows to Linux OS's. That's a common misconception that many Windows users make. Linux is it's own operating system without a commercial bent and thus no need to keep selling the same thing over and over again to the same people.
There are some distributions that are interested in selling their packaging against the Windows packaging and this list doesn't have anything to do with that - fedora is a free distribution.
For some things, GUI is a more efficient way of doing them. For other things, you can't beat the power of the command line. The problem of course is the knowledge of when and how and between Macintosh and Windows, there's a lot of computer users that have little interest, little reason to garner up the knowledge of things to get up and running and thus rely on setup wizards. Most of the Linux distributions aren't quite up to the level of Windows wizards. For other users, i.e. the ones that aren't afraid to learn some of the inner workings of a computer, once they get over their fear of something different, like Linux, a majority of them will appreciate the education they get, finally figuring out how things are supposed to work and the ability to fix things without 'reboot' or 'dump and reload' philosophy which is so prevalent with Windows usage because of the various inaccessible internals.
Craig
akonstam@trinity.edu wrote:
On Sun, Oct 02, 2005 at 09:18:45PM +0800, "國產 Wei-Yee Chan (Made in Chinar)" wrote:
Yes, it's happening to me too and I'm having thoughts about switching to another distribution.
Yeaw Chu Lee wrote:
That seems rather extreme reaction since: 1, If it is reported to bugzilla it can be fixed. 2, The 1.2.38-0 version works , 3. Adding a group is so easy to do by command line processing.
Hi!
Has anyone updated *system-config-users-1.2.39-0.fc4.1* recently and found that adding new groups do not work anymore? The add new users work just fine... but I can't seem to create AND edit groups. It just showed a grey out box with a busy cursor all the time.
Or am I the only one with this problem? ... sigh ...
I would appreciate any response. Thanks.
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
I have found this problem on two new installs and I added the groups via the command line. They show up but I think they didn't get transfered to shadow groups properly.
There is a bug report submitted.
As for those that support Windows in bug problems. There is a bug that I read about this morning that has been public knowledge since April and still isn't fixed. Now a new virus. Here a bug is on a new upgraded package and it will probably be fixed by the end of the week if not sooner. Heck it is a python coding issue.
Also, FC4 is as close to bleeding edge that is safe but I rely on it to work. So one little thing doesn't work as expected.
Thanks for the encouragement. Perhaps I just couldn't get over the incident that happened to me ten years ago. Your right, the command line is king. I've saved many users with that, even Windoze ones. ;-)
Les Mikesell wrote:
Actually, executing complicated commands repeatedly is where the
command line wins, especially complicated sequences that no GUI programmer anticipated. All you have to do is type the command sequence into a file, give it a short name and type the short name every time you want to run the script. That is, at the shell level, every command you can run from the keyboard is automatically the same thing you would execute from a file in a script. If there are a few variables between runs, the shell provides adequate methods to accept and substitute them into the script. GUI's on the other hand often have no scripting mechanism at all, so you have to sit and wait and watch for the right time to punch the mouse. And when they do offer scripting each re-invents it with some new bizarre syntax that doesn't interoperate with anything else, while the unix shell has worked the same way for 30 years or so. If you are drawing pictures, a GUI makes sense. To give commands to a program, it doesn't.
Right, I could either use the command line or wait for the fix, which I anticipate, isn't gonna be a long wait. But what about the recent X-org fiasco? I wouldn't consider that a small issue. Well, I don't know.....Perhaps Fedora isn't the right distribution for people like me.
Robin Laing wrote:
I have found this problem on two new installs and I added the groups via the command line. They show up but I think they didn't get transfered to shadow groups properly.
There is a bug report submitted.
As for those that support Windows in bug problems. There is a bug that I read about this morning that has been public knowledge since April and still isn't fixed. Now a new virus. Here a bug is on a new upgraded package and it will probably be fixed by the end of the week if not sooner. Heck it is a python coding issue.
Also, FC4 is as close to bleeding edge that is safe but I rely on it to work. So one little thing doesn't work as expected.
I don't mean to be rude, but if your speaking in your personal capacity, then all is fine, but if your speaking on behalf of the Linux community, then I'd have to refute your claims.
Having numbers on our side helps plenty, really. Microsoft is one good example.
Craig White wrote:
The problems with your assumptions are:
Linux isn't interested in obtaining wholesale switchovers from Windows to Linux OS's. That's a common misconception that many Windows users make. Linux is it's own operating system without a commercial bent and thus no need to keep selling the same thing over and over again to the same people.
There are some distributions that are interested in selling their packaging against the Windows packaging and this list doesn't have anything to do with that - fedora is a free distribution.
For some things, GUI is a more efficient way of doing them. For other things, you can't beat the power of the command line. The problem of course is the knowledge of when and how and between Macintosh and Windows, there's a lot of computer users that have little interest, little reason to garner up the knowledge of things to get up and running and thus rely on setup wizards. Most of the Linux distributions aren't quite up to the level of Windows wizards. For other users, i.e. the ones that aren't afraid to learn some of the inner workings of a computer, once they get over their fear of something different, like Linux, a majority of them will appreciate the education they get, finally figuring out how things are supposed to work and the ability to fix things without 'reboot' or 'dump and reload' philosophy which is so prevalent with Windows usage because of the various inaccessible internals.
Craig
In fact, I was considering Ubuntu, but I might wanna give Centos a go instead.
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Mon, 2005-10-03 at 03:00, "國產 Wei-Yee Chan (Made in Chinar)" wrote:
Actually, I'm thinking along the line of stability. Debian is on my mind.
I'd recommend Centos for that as well. It is built from the same source RPMs used in Red Hat Enterprise Linux, which is almost the same as has gone through extensive real-world use in fedora. I've never quite been able to figure out the release schedule for Debian if there is one an it seemed like you had to run a mix of stuff from their unstable repository to stay current. Maybe Ubuntu will change that, although they are too new to have much of a track record on updates.
On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 03:16:21AM +0800, "國產 Wei-Yee Chan (Made in Chinar)" wrote:
Right, I could either use the command line or wait for the fix, which I anticipate, isn't gonna be a long wait. But what about the recent X-org fiasco? I wouldn't consider that a small issue. Well, I don't know.....Perhaps Fedora isn't the right distribution for people like me.
Maybe you are right,. but the xorg bug was fixed in less than a week. How do you get Microsoft to fix a bug in a week. I could make a long list of things you can't so in windows that are useful to do. Have one terminal window in China, one in Japan, one in Texas and one in France. And in each window be able to do processing on different systems at the same time. If you just want to edit documents maybe Windows is better. ------------------------------------------- Aaron Konstam Computer Science Trinity University telephone: (210)-999-7484
At 3:58 PM +0800 10/3/05, =?UTF-8?B?IuWci+eUoiBXZWktWWVlIENoYW4gKE1hZGUgaW4gQ2hpbmFyKSI= wrote:
Jeff Vian wrote:
That seems rather extreme reaction since: 1, If it is reported to bugzilla it can be fixed. 2, The 1.2.38-0 version works , 3. Adding a group is so easy to do by command line processing.
I agree with all of these, but #3 is hard to do for those who are intimidated or otherwise petrified by the thought of using a command line interface. This may be because they don't like to, have never needed to, or refuse to, but it still applies.
So many users are limited to using gui tools and the often restricted functionality of them that it scares me.
One of the reasons why Windoze users are so hesitant about switching to Linux is that they fear having to use the command line. If Linux is to win users over, it'd have to go the GUI way. Let me tell U a story. More than ten years ago, I was using WordPerfect 5.0 and a uni mate was using MS Word. I thought that I was smarter as WordPerfect was much harder use, whereas MS Word was merely a matter of point-and-click. The fact is, my uni mate could churn out a piece of work in a fraction of the time that I could, even though she was what we called, a "computer illiterate".
Personally, I think that doing things the GUI way is more efficient. There's this package that I use everyday that requires me to compile a source rpm everytime I upgrade the kernel, and anytime I need to use it, I have to key in a very long command. Now, wouldn't a GUI version be simpler and more efficient for the user?
For most users the GUI would be the only way at all, but as for you, why not put that very long command into a small script and save it for next time? ____________________________________________________________________ TonyN.:' mailto:tonynelson@georgeanelson.com ' http://www.georgeanelson.com/
Well, actually what I do is copy the command from a text file containing all my frequently used commands, and then paste it onto the terminal. This may seem simple enough to people like U but it might not be so for the majority of the people out there.
Many of U may not agree with me on this, but the reason why Mac OSX and Windoze are popular is that they have a good GUI, and there're many good reasons why people prefer the GUI to the command line.
Tony Nelson wrote:
For most users the GUI would be the only way at all, but as for you, why not put that very long command into a small script and save it for next time? ____________________________________________________________________ TonyN.:' mailto:tonynelson@georgeanelson.com ' http://www.georgeanelson.com/
I'm doing what U have mentioned, on Windoze. In fact, I'm doing it everyday. ;-)
Don't get me wrong - I'm not promoting M$. The fact is, the X-org bug wasn't exactly a minor issue. If I were to make a comparison, bringing Windoze into the picture might not be appropriate. As I've mentioned in my earlier post, I was considering a more stable Linux distribution.
akonstam@trinity.edu wrote:
On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 03:16:21AM +0800, "國產 Wei-Yee Chan (Made in Chinar)" wrote:
Right, I could either use the command line or wait for the fix, which I anticipate, isn't gonna be a long wait. But what about the recent X-org fiasco? I wouldn't consider that a small issue. Well, I don't know.....Perhaps Fedora isn't the right distribution for people like me.
Maybe you are right,. but the xorg bug was fixed in less than a week. How do you get Microsoft to fix a bug in a week. I could make a long list of things you can't so in windows that are useful to do. Have one terminal window in China, one in Japan, one in Texas and one in France. And in each window be able to do processing on different systems at the same time. If you just want to edit documents maybe Windows is better.
Aaron Konstam Computer Science Trinity University telephone: (210)-999-7484
"國產 Wei-Yee Chan (Made in Chinar)" wrote:
Right, I could either use the command line or wait for the fix, which I anticipate, isn't gonna be a long wait. But what about the recent X-org fiasco? I wouldn't consider that a small issue. Well, I don't know.....Perhaps Fedora isn't the right distribution for people like me.
Aaron Konstam:
Maybe you are right,. but the xorg bug was fixed in less than a week.
What? The i810 (and related families) one goes back a few months.
On Sun, Oct 02, 2005 at 08:19:48AM -0500, akonstam wrote:
On Sun, Oct 02, 2005 at 09:18:45PM +0800, "國產 Wei-Yee Chan (Made in Chinar)" wrote:
Yes, it's happening to me too and I'm having thoughts about switching to another distribution.
Yeaw Chu Lee wrote:
That seems rather extreme reaction since: 1, If it is reported to bugzilla it can be fixed. 2, The 1.2.38-0 version works , 3. Adding a group is so easy to do by command line processing.
I hate to indicate my prophetic talents but the new: system-config-users.noarch 0:1.2.41-0 allows you to add groups. Didn't take to long to get fix, at least this time ------------------------------------------- Aaron Konstam Computer Science Trinity University telephone: (210)-999-7484
On Mon, 2005-10-03 at 07:37 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
I'd recommend Centos for that as well...
Maybe Ubuntu will change that, although they are too new to have much of a track record on updates.
What would You say on Slackware regarding all this staff?
-
"國產 Wei-Yee Chan (Made in Chinar)" -
akonstam＠trinity.edu -
Craig White -
Jeff Vian -
Les Mikesell -
micheal -
Robin Laing -
Strong -
Tim -
Tony Nelson -
Yeaw Chu Lee