I think we have a fundamental difference in ideology here, which I suspect we will not resolve and have to agree to differ on.

I do not think mainstream distros should pander to the newbie, that is what specialist distros are for.

I know Ubuntu has changed recently but disabling root and obfuscating is resurrection was bit like Mercedes saying that travelling above 130Kph is dangerous so we will fit a speed limiter to ALL our cars, even the F1 ones.

Well, now if you look at the Ubuntu website, there is no trace of Linux on it anywhere, so I would say that Ubuntu is not Linux so much anymore. I would have to say, I'm reverting back to Debian, Arch and CentOS.

It probably depends on your interpretation of what 'Linux' is.

To me if it has Linus's kernel and GNU applications and is distributed under the GPL then it is Linux.

1 members found this post helpful.

My very first linux distro was sent to me on CD via mail for free. I found a web site way back where some guy was offering to send CD's with RedHat on them to people wanting to switch for free, so I sent him an email and he replied and promptly mailed me a CD. Very cool of him. Can't remember his name or site though, this was like 15 years ago or so.

I got the same free deal from Debian and Solaris but not my first — pepole changing the world - - Ubuntu I think gets a bad name because of it's simplicity? But, it's a good transition from $impli¢ity!

It is not a case of board members feeling humbled by others' experience. The problem is many people who know little or nothing post the "I have been a sysadmin for ... years" line when refusing to admit they are wrong. System administrators and administratrixes exist on a wide spectrum. From those who are experts to those who know almost nothing. In fact, many so-called administrators do not have a clue. The only thing they know is how to connect Windows to the internet using a GUI, but got their jobs simply because they know more than the people who hired them. A real world example; the reason I know how to set up internet connections is because I was living on a university campus that had a LAN with static IP addresses and DNS. The "IT technician" had no clue what to do with a Linux system, even though the Network Manager GUI was installed. His conclusion was my computer was broken. I then fiddled with the connection, until I got it working. I now know more than most IT technicians in China. That is why on a board like this one, being a sysadmin of ... years is not taken as a designation of expertise.

What would you like me to do - post my CV?

The difference is that your opinion is based on your own somewhat flawed ideology which is in turn based on several common misconceptions, whereas others are speaking from a more technical perspective.
This statement is somewhat vague. Can you define "specialist distros" and "mainstream distros"? Can you explain what mainstream distros have done to make things "noob friendly"?
No one actually cares how qualified you are or otherwise. That's the point you're missing (spectacularly). sysadmin or not, you're quite simply wrong. Waving qualifications won't make you right. Users here or on any forums will be judged on the quality of the advice they give, not on how qualified they claim to be.

No one who is a *nix sysadmin would log into a X session as root or advocate doing so.

No one who is a *nix sysadmin would need to discuss this or complain about it on any forum, as they would know how to log into an X session as root, if they really needed to do so, irrespective of the display manager in use or restrictions imposed by the distro and would understand why we do not run the X server as root in the first place.

NO! I am right - you are wrong - so there!

No.

Wrong again - in so many ways!

I have no problem with any REAL UNIX system just the childish obfuscations of some patronising distro creators who seem to think they know better than the user.

I draw your attention to
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...debian-745036/
And suggest you read post #14

In many ways they do know better than the user. I will phrase it this way: Anyone who has to ask on a forum how to log in as root to a GUI shouldn't do it in the first place because he lacks the knowledge of the implications. Seasoned sysadmins with enough understanding of the topic are either able to disable the restrictions already or are able to find the relevant information how to do so with a websearch in less than one minute.

When I look at the post you refer to, as a seasoned sysadmin you should know that the person that wrote #14 has not even the proper knowledge about runlevels on Debian and how to stop and start services on Debian and uses many unnecessary commands to get a root login. These are the type of users I talk about, they obviously lack the knowledge of the implications. Seriously, why would a developer be hindered by restrictions on a GUI root login? You may want to read my answer to that in #17.

Can we now get this thread back on topic? If there is a need for further discussion please open a new thread about it.

I don't know about Mercedes because I am a BMW guy and they limit their cars to 250kph electronically and when you actually do that (on a sunday morning on a desert highway) you just feel it cuts 2 cylinders out of the loop... Hmm, you can change that with another chip.
But seriously, I feel if Linux wants to be more mainstream it will be more Win-like. And, yes Ubuntu and LinuxMint and others are real linuxes and yes I know the Linux people don't like it but for me it is the way to go. You see, you just have to teach people to use for instance a command line, it's really not that hard. I could do it knowing next to nothing of PC's, linux etc!The only thing you need is the will and desire to do it.

As per moderator request above discussion now on
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...46#post5054446

you probably meant, so few choices... have you i.e. ever tried to configure bonding in yast ?
It's as old as it's true, my own opinion.Whenever SLES12.3 will hit me (I'd never choose my own) I'll come back to you but I'd really be surprised if SuSE backed off from yast and all the f*cking scripts.Hmm... a lot more Linux than SLES?! What do you exaclty mean? Ubuntu is pretty much shielding from what you recognize as Linux, but it's still ok and a quick fix. -> sudo su;passwd

---------- Post added 10-30-13 at 10:10 AM ----------

Does anyone remember the famous Seagate ST225 MFM(!) HDD ? so loud...

That's exactly what I meant with prejudice. They use exactly the standard conf-files everybody uses -- and handle them by YAST if you so wish. You can do it with vi (done it) or whatever you want.

I never even heard of "bonding". What ist that, btw.?

Anyhow, you are graciously granted your own opinion . That only doesn't mean that there have been no changes in good ole SuSE.

Have you ever had a look at them ?
Huh... well...something that isn't supported by SLES... while it should be supported by a pro-Linux-distro.
The machines I'm forced to work with are currently on 11.2 and I don't see changes on what I complain about over the last years. Let's see.

Some reading for you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link_aggregation

You wouldn't want to miss bonding for any server and it's in since kernel 2.0, so nothing new or fancy.

The contradicting thing here... if you ever needed to configure bonding manually on a SLES box.... NEVER EVER start yast-networking again... because your setup will be gone.

That's not what I call linux.

The only ever use case I'd choose linux for would be an ISDN Modem setup, though this won't happen probably.