Sunday, April 20, 2008
Hardy Heron fixes hard coded color scheme
Just a quick note. I've been testing Hardy Heron since it went beta. Everything seems to be working really well. I just noticed today that the hard coded color scheme as referenced in my previous article (http://happylinuxthoughts.blogspot.com/2007/12/out-with-brown-on-ubuntu.html) that was in previous Ubuntu releases has been fixed. When you change the color scheme of the desktop, and the background color of the login screen, everything works just like it should instead of having a momentary brown background that doesn't match your color scheme.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
OpenSuse 11.0 Alpha 2, Initial Reaction
I've been a fan of the Suse distro for quite some time now, even though it's not my primary distro of choice. I thought I would download the alpha and see how things are coming along.
The installation process was almost identical to 10.3. In fact, most of the screens still showed that it was 10.3. The only difference was the look of the installer. I have to say, it does look quite nice. I was impressed when I was even able to choose my time zone by clicking on the map and zooming to my location.
I picked the gnome desktop to install, because that's what I've grown accustomed to and seems to be the standard these days. It was pretty obvious that it was in alpha stage when I wasn't able to open the system menu by left clicking. I instead had to right click and choose open. Other than that, everything seemed to be shaping up nicely. Being that yast is the main config tool for Suse, you would think it would be on the main menu, but you actually have to go looking for it in more applications. I think that's an oversight of the developers. I'm sure a lot more changes are coming for the gnome side of things, because it looked kind of half and half 10.3/11.0.
The installer doesn't give you the option to install both gnome and kde, so I had to go into yast, and choose all the kde packages. I was curious to see how kde 4 is coming along, so I installed it. Overall kde 4 looks pretty good. I don't like how the menus function though. To expand the menus, you have to click, and then it kind of slides over, and to get back you have to click back. I would say the whole menu system looks pretty nice but is a huge step back in functionality.
If you're going to install the distro at this point, I highly recommend using a virtual machine. You're probably gonna keep it around long enough to check out the new features and test the software. But, I wouldn't say it's completely usable at this time. And, that's not what it was intended for, by developers (That's why it's still Alpha)
Enjoy
The installation process was almost identical to 10.3. In fact, most of the screens still showed that it was 10.3. The only difference was the look of the installer. I have to say, it does look quite nice. I was impressed when I was even able to choose my time zone by clicking on the map and zooming to my location.
I picked the gnome desktop to install, because that's what I've grown accustomed to and seems to be the standard these days. It was pretty obvious that it was in alpha stage when I wasn't able to open the system menu by left clicking. I instead had to right click and choose open. Other than that, everything seemed to be shaping up nicely. Being that yast is the main config tool for Suse, you would think it would be on the main menu, but you actually have to go looking for it in more applications. I think that's an oversight of the developers. I'm sure a lot more changes are coming for the gnome side of things, because it looked kind of half and half 10.3/11.0.
The installer doesn't give you the option to install both gnome and kde, so I had to go into yast, and choose all the kde packages. I was curious to see how kde 4 is coming along, so I installed it. Overall kde 4 looks pretty good. I don't like how the menus function though. To expand the menus, you have to click, and then it kind of slides over, and to get back you have to click back. I would say the whole menu system looks pretty nice but is a huge step back in functionality.
If you're going to install the distro at this point, I highly recommend using a virtual machine. You're probably gonna keep it around long enough to check out the new features and test the software. But, I wouldn't say it's completely usable at this time. And, that's not what it was intended for, by developers (That's why it's still Alpha)
Enjoy
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Just one more reason I can't stand Windows Vista
The task: remotely set up a customer's openvpn client to connect to an openvpn server on windows vista. (on xp, this is a simple task)
Problem: vpn client won't connect.
Resolution: slightly improved; vpn now connects, but doesn't route traffic properly. Must contact vendor for further vista insight.
Due to the "Security" features of vista, it doesn't allow a vpn client to function, unless it's run by Administrator. Funny thing is, the account we were logged in as was supposedly an administrator.
First thing I had to do was show hidden files, and known file extensions. The process was changed for vista for no apparent reason, just like most everything else in vista.
The next thing I had to do was an msconfig. Then I had to select the vpn client, go to properties, and checkmark the "run as administrator" box. After that, a reboot, and the client was able to connect to the vpn and ping the vpn ip address, but traffic wasn't routed correctly. Not able to resolve the routing issue, we now have to contact the vendor for further support and suggestions.
Sounds simple enough, but it took a lot of google searching and experimentation. I see all this as completely unnecessary crap, since it would be a 5 minute task in Linux, even though Linux is a much more secure OS.
Personally, I think that Vista will be passed over in the corporate sector because of all the support hassles it will cause.
Problem: vpn client won't connect.
Resolution: slightly improved; vpn now connects, but doesn't route traffic properly. Must contact vendor for further vista insight.
Due to the "Security" features of vista, it doesn't allow a vpn client to function, unless it's run by Administrator. Funny thing is, the account we were logged in as was supposedly an administrator.
First thing I had to do was show hidden files, and known file extensions. The process was changed for vista for no apparent reason, just like most everything else in vista.
The next thing I had to do was an msconfig. Then I had to select the vpn client, go to properties, and checkmark the "run as administrator" box. After that, a reboot, and the client was able to connect to the vpn and ping the vpn ip address, but traffic wasn't routed correctly. Not able to resolve the routing issue, we now have to contact the vendor for further support and suggestions.
Sounds simple enough, but it took a lot of google searching and experimentation. I see all this as completely unnecessary crap, since it would be a 5 minute task in Linux, even though Linux is a much more secure OS.
Personally, I think that Vista will be passed over in the corporate sector because of all the support hassles it will cause.
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Secure system to system file copies without Samba or NFS
What if you need to copy files from one system to another, but don't want to bother with setting up file shares (SAMBA or NFS)? It's actually very quick and simple.
All you need is the scp command. The tricky part is getting the syntax correct, but I'll help you with that. For this example, let's just say you're copying a file from one user's desktop to another user's desktop. Here's how you would do it.....
scp filename username@remotesystem:/home/username/Desktop/
Once you provide this command, it will ask you for the password on the remote system. Of course you need the correct credentials or it will fail.
Now, if you want to copy from the other system to your system, you can do that as well, with a quick command line switch.
----
scp -r filename username@remotesystem:/home/username/Desktop/filename .
----
Keep this command all together. Long commands tend to breakup in small formats like this.
The -r indicates that you're copying from the remote system to the local system instead of the other way around. Also, the period at the end of the command indicates that you're copying to the current directory. Without a destination directory, the command will not work, so this is important. You could put any location there as long as you have proper permission. Enjoy.
All you need is the scp command. The tricky part is getting the syntax correct, but I'll help you with that. For this example, let's just say you're copying a file from one user's desktop to another user's desktop. Here's how you would do it.....
scp filename username@remotesystem:/home/username/Desktop/
Once you provide this command, it will ask you for the password on the remote system. Of course you need the correct credentials or it will fail.
Now, if you want to copy from the other system to your system, you can do that as well, with a quick command line switch.
----
scp -r filename username@remotesystem:/home/username/Desktop/filename .
----
Keep this command all together. Long commands tend to breakup in small formats like this.
The -r indicates that you're copying from the remote system to the local system instead of the other way around. Also, the period at the end of the command indicates that you're copying to the current directory. Without a destination directory, the command will not work, so this is important. You could put any location there as long as you have proper permission. Enjoy.
Thursday, December 6, 2007
Out with the Brown on Ubuntu
To change themes completely to a different color in Ubuntu should be trivial and take only a couple of clicks. It seems though that there is a bug that prevents the background screen from changing colors. I'm going to go through the process of changing everything to a different color.
The first place we need to go is the "System", "Preferences", and "Appearance" menus. Select the background tab. From there I pick the solid color, and then select an alternative color. (Blue, in my case) You can of course download a wallpaper and use that as well. Then select the theme tab to choose a non-brown theme.
The next place we need to go is "System", "Administration", and "Login Window" menus. Select the
local tab. Once there, I chose the Happy Gnome theme and changed the background color to blue.
That should be the only steps required to get rid of all the brown. However, while logging on, the brown background still persists. After searching for a while, I did find a fix.
The script /etc/gdm/PreSession/Default is at fault.
You can download a version that fixes the background color like this:
wget http://ubuntu.freehostia.com/Default
Then just copy that to the original directory, restart your session, and the brown will be gone.
Because you shouldn't just blindly copy files into your system without knowing what's in them, here's a comparison of the two files, showing what's been changed. I used the program TkDiff to display the output you see here. The original file is on the left, while the new file is on the right.
That's all she wrote.
The first place we need to go is the "System", "Preferences", and "Appearance" menus. Select the background tab. From there I pick the solid color, and then select an alternative color. (Blue, in my case) You can of course download a wallpaper and use that as well. Then select the theme tab to choose a non-brown theme.
The next place we need to go is "System", "Administration", and "Login Window" menus. Select the
local tab. Once there, I chose the Happy Gnome theme and changed the background color to blue.
That should be the only steps required to get rid of all the brown. However, while logging on, the brown background still persists. After searching for a while, I did find a fix.
The script /etc/gdm/PreSession/Default is at fault.
You can download a version that fixes the background color like this:
wget http://ubuntu.freehostia.com/Default
Then just copy that to the original directory, restart your session, and the brown will be gone.
Because you shouldn't just blindly copy files into your system without knowing what's in them, here's a comparison of the two files, showing what's been changed. I used the program TkDiff to display the output you see here. The original file is on the left, while the new file is on the right.
That's all she wrote.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Most TV networks online aren't Linux friendly
After my original article on ABC.COM (ABC.COM article), I thought I would do a little more research and see how the other major networks fared with Linux. And, here are the results...
ABC.COM - As I originally mentioned, ABC's shows will not work in Linux.
FOX.COM - Their shows can only be viewed on Windows and Mac systems.
TBS.COM - Once again, we have a network that's ignorant to the fact that there are Linux users. I wasn't given an error message, I just wasn't able to play the episodes.
CWTV.COM - Their video ads worked perfectly, but the full episodes only work on Windows and Mac.
CBS.COM - Online episodes were easily viewable.
NBC.COM - Not only was I able to watch online episodes, it was very easy to use.
Congratulations to CBS and NBC for being forward thinking and allowing people on any OS to view their TV shows. ABC, FOX, TBS and the CW need to get on board (sounds like the developers at ABC are already working on this). Please stop by their sites and give them feedback, if you feel they should support ALL OS's.
ABC.COM - As I originally mentioned, ABC's shows will not work in Linux.
FOX.COM - Their shows can only be viewed on Windows and Mac systems.
TBS.COM - Once again, we have a network that's ignorant to the fact that there are Linux users. I wasn't given an error message, I just wasn't able to play the episodes.
CWTV.COM - Their video ads worked perfectly, but the full episodes only work on Windows and Mac.
CBS.COM - Online episodes were easily viewable.
NBC.COM - Not only was I able to watch online episodes, it was very easy to use.
Congratulations to CBS and NBC for being forward thinking and allowing people on any OS to view their TV shows. ABC, FOX, TBS and the CW need to get on board (sounds like the developers at ABC are already working on this). Please stop by their sites and give them feedback, if you feel they should support ALL OS's.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
ABC.COM developer responds to Linux blog
Here is my original post about ABC.COM compatibility.
http://happylinuxthoughts.blogspot.com/2007/11/abccom-isnt-linux-friendly.html
Don't ever think that we Linux users have no hope for support. If we keep voicing our opinions, we will be heard. Here is the comment from an ABC developer, or move networks developer..........
We're working on getting a port sanctioned by management.
- A dev at Move Networks
November 28, 2007 2:30 PM
This isn't definitive, but at least they see there's demand. Keep sending your feedback!
Here's my new article with an investigation of Linux compatibility for all major television networks. Television networks Linux compatibility.
http://happylinuxthoughts.blogspot.com/2007/11/abccom-isnt-linux-friendly.html
Don't ever think that we Linux users have no hope for support. If we keep voicing our opinions, we will be heard. Here is the comment from an ABC developer, or move networks developer..........
We're working on getting a port sanctioned by management.
- A dev at Move Networks
November 28, 2007 2:30 PM
This isn't definitive, but at least they see there's demand. Keep sending your feedback!
Here's my new article with an investigation of Linux compatibility for all major television networks. Television networks Linux compatibility.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)