LinuxQuestions.org
Latest LQ Deal: Latest LQ Deals
Home Forums Tutorials Articles Register
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 07-25-2012, 08:31 AM   #16
vdemuth
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Location: West Midlands, UK
Distribution: Slackware 14 (Server),OpenSuse 13.2 (Laptop & Desktop),, OpenSuse 13.2 on the wifes lappy
Posts: 781

Rep: Reputation: 98

Quote:
Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H View Post
I think I'll just disable udisks if possible, just like I disabled polkit and consolekit, etc.
Now that's an interesting idea. But what is the effect of disabling them to the average end user?
 
Old 07-25-2012, 08:36 AM   #17
H_TeXMeX_H
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301
Quote:
Originally Posted by vdemuth View Post
Now that's an interesting idea. But what is the effect of disabling them to the average end user?
I'm assuming it will just prevent auto-mounting, which I have no need of anyway. I use Rox-Filer and it will mount things in fstab when you click on the mount points. It's exactly what I need, because I don't always want it to auto-mount. Sometimes I want to read a disk raw without mounting it.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 07-25-2012, 10:22 AM   #18
guanx
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,185

Rep: Reputation: 237Reputation: 237Reputation: 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H View Post
I'm assuming it will just prevent auto-mounting, which I have no need of anyway. I use Rox-Filer and it will mount things in fstab when you click on the mount points. It's exactly what I need, because I don't always want it to auto-mount. Sometimes I want to read a disk raw without mounting it.
So disabling all such things only affects auto-mounting, but not manual mounting as an unpriveleged user without write access to "/etc/fstab", nor other things like restart/hibernating the system as an unpriveleged user from the console ... Did I understand it right?
 
Old 07-25-2012, 10:27 AM   #19
H_TeXMeX_H
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301
I don't know about restarting or hibernating as I don't use these. I would have to test it. As long as you are in the power group I think you should be able to restart and hibernate as user.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 07-25-2012, 10:43 AM   #20
guanx
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,185

Rep: Reputation: 237Reputation: 237Reputation: 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H View Post
I don't know about restarting or hibernating as I don't use these. I would have to test it. As long as you are in the power group I think you should be able to restart and hibernate as user.
Thank you! I didn't know of the power group before. -- Always thought I was able to shutdown because I was directly in front of the console; not even tried remotely.
 
Old 07-28-2012, 08:13 AM   #21
H_TeXMeX_H
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301
There's this article about GNOME losing relevance:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...tem&px=MTE0ODI

Maybe GNOME will disappear and spare us their bad code and dependency hell.
 
Old 07-28-2012, 04:46 PM   #22
kabamaru
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2011
Location: Greece
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 276

Rep: Reputation: 134Reputation: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H View Post
Maybe GNOME will disappear and spare us their bad code and dependency hell.
It looks like they're planning to conquer the world instead.
 
Old 07-28-2012, 06:31 PM   #23
BlackRider
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2011
Posts: 295

Rep: Reputation: 101Reputation: 101
From my limited perspective, I would say the World Domination Plan is actually wet paper.
 
Old 07-29-2012, 01:50 PM   #24
H_TeXMeX_H
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackRider View Post
From my limited perspective, I would say the World Domination Plan is actually wet paper.
... wet and sticky.
 
Old 07-30-2012, 08:56 PM   #25
ReaperX7
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Location: California
Distribution: Slackware64-15.0 Multilib
Posts: 6,558
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 2097Reputation: 2097Reputation: 2097Reputation: 2097Reputation: 2097Reputation: 2097Reputation: 2097Reputation: 2097Reputation: 2097Reputation: 2097Reputation: 2097
LMAO.

More traditional desktops like Xfce and KDE are really easier to migrate into from other operating systems. The problem of GNOME is, it's getting too heavy handed against it's own software and pulling further and further into the system rather than being modular.

Now GNOME's libraries and programs that can be used on non-GNOME environments work very well often even in KDE and Xfce and dependencies now are just a fact of life. I don't see the programs themselves going away per-say, but I do see a time when the actual GNOME desktop environment will not be around.
 
Old 07-30-2012, 09:15 PM   #26
baldheaded-yeti
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Oct 2011
Location: Tennessee
Distribution: Slackware 14.1
Posts: 25

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H View Post
I think I'll just disable udisks if possible, just like I disabled polkit and consolekit, etc.
In another part of LQ I suggested a vanilla linux sans KDE or GNOME libraries. That didn't fly well.

Looks like FVWM and mc for me.
 
Old 07-30-2012, 10:45 PM   #27
ttk
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2012
Location: Sebastopol, CA
Distribution: Slackware64
Posts: 1,038
Blog Entries: 27

Rep: Reputation: 1484Reputation: 1484Reputation: 1484Reputation: 1484Reputation: 1484Reputation: 1484Reputation: 1484Reputation: 1484Reputation: 1484Reputation: 1484
Quote:
Originally Posted by baldheaded-yeti View Post
In another part of LQ I suggested a vanilla linux sans KDE or GNOME libraries. That didn't fly well.

Looks like FVWM and mc for me.
Sure, why not? That's what I do (well, fvwm anyway .. never got in the habit of using mc, tend to use bash instead for file management).

Eschewing with the kdei and/or kde directories are a nice way to slim down an already slim distribution, though with how massive even thumbdrives have gotten there's not much point.

If all you need is a no-frills window manager with oodles of configurability and all the virtual desktops you can eat, with no need for a "desktop environment", fvwm is just fine. And unlike kde and gnome, fvwm is pretty much guaranteed to remain sane and solid forever.
 
Old 07-30-2012, 10:50 PM   #28
ReaperX7
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Location: California
Distribution: Slackware64-15.0 Multilib
Posts: 6,558
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 2097Reputation: 2097Reputation: 2097Reputation: 2097Reputation: 2097Reputation: 2097Reputation: 2097Reputation: 2097Reputation: 2097Reputation: 2097Reputation: 2097
Xfce is still fairly lightweight compared to KDE and GNOME in spite of it's dependencies that keep getting added. I've installed Xfce onto systems and don't have anywhere near the same level of tools and software KDE and GNOME include.

I'll stick to Xfce anyways. Even if it's growing as a desktop environment and taking more stuff into it, it's still faster, more compact, and more featured as a complete environment.
 
Old 07-31-2012, 06:54 AM   #29
baldheaded-yeti
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Oct 2011
Location: Tennessee
Distribution: Slackware 14.1
Posts: 25

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Is udisks2 really necessary ?

Last edited by baldheaded-yeti; 07-31-2012 at 08:47 AM.
 
Old 08-01-2012, 03:15 AM   #30
Pixxt
Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Distribution: Slackware, Debian,
Posts: 290

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 186Reputation: 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by baldheaded-yeti View Post
Is udisks2 really necessary ?
For Xfce, then yes...
 
  


Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LXer: Loss Leaders and Linux LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 09-29-2010 08:30 PM
loss information by installing linux mjalalynia Linux - General 2 07-14-2008 08:59 AM
loss of internet with sabayon linux matuk_444 Linux - Newbie 6 03-07-2007 05:12 PM
50% packet loss only with Linux alexdanoob Linux - Networking 2 04-21-2004 05:24 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:16 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration