On 01/23/2015 05:50 AM, Bill Maltby (C4B) wrote: > On Fri, 2015-01-23 at 16:18 +1300, Rob Kampen wrote: >> On 01/23/2015 04:05 PM, Always Learning wrote: >>> On Thu, 2015-01-22 at 21:19 -0500, Bill Maltby (C4B) wrote: >>> >>>> I object to this sort of crap. Hidden, no reason for an *IX desktop to >>>> be forced to ignore or deal with this crap. >>>> >>>> Anybody else seeing it? >>>> >>>> In case attachments aren't allowed in the list, here's the Dropbox url >>>> for the image. >>>> >>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/b2p2ki7t2rwi5ot/FreeDeskTop_Org_Orwell_1984.png?dl=0 >>>> >>>> I believe this relates to an earlier thread in which someone questioned >>>> what that Freedesktop.org stuff was doing (as did I). >>>> >>>> Any help appreciated. >>> What is going-on ? It really looks Windozed ! Looking at it makes me >>> feel ill. >>> >>> >> Seriously?? >> If, as most linux folk do, you run your desktop as a normal user (i.e. >> NOT root) and then you try to do some system type changing, then there >> are two options - >> 1. tell the user to go away >> 2. ask for suitable credentials >> The authenticate dialog box is offering to complete the task as long the >> password for root is supplied - what on earth is wrong with that? >> On the command line you just get a cryptic not allowed, insufficient >> rights etc. type message, with GUI the developer is interpreting this >> and offering to escalate privileges if you can prove you are allowed. >> >> Most of the applications under the system/administration tab of the >> gnome desktop offer this kind of dialog. >> Sorry I don't see the reason for the paranoia. > > Everyone's entitled to his own opinion, so I respect your right to that > view. > > First, as to paranoia, how much $ is spent because of justified paranoia > in this world? ISTM that paranoia is justified by that alone. Second, I > spent too many years working with "those who know best" developing > software and systems when there was rigorous methodology to have any > unjustified faith in those who now work in a "throw it against the user > wall and see what sticks or gets reported as buggy" methodology. > > I don't want this stupid thing popping up every time I switch from my > normal active user logons to my "dead" one (used to get around the > unaddressed bug I filed over a month ago about switching run levels > causing crashes and running multiple users as I'd been doing for ... > over a decade(?) on CentOS). > > Even windows doesn't make me repeatedly click cancel if I'm not ready to > update (I have one Windows box for one application I do and my wife has > a couple) - it raise a little ... "flag" saying updates are available (I > have "check with me" set rather than allowing auto updates). > > Yesterday on this 6.6 box I had to click cancel many times - most on one > switch of users as apparently they queue up. > > AFAIK, tools are provided (sudo, "su -", ...) for non-root users to > invoke and accomplish these functions on *their* schedule, rather than > that set by some anonymous "one who knows better". Then turn off the service that does/offers auto updates in GUI mode.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
