Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


This user doesn't have any awards

About throttlemeister

  • Title
  • Birthday 1970-12-15

Contact Methods

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Computers, motorcycles
  • Occupation
    Sr. IT Consultant


  • CPU
    i7 5960X
  • Motherboard
    Asus Deluxe-2
  • RAM
    64GB Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR4/2400
  • GPU
    EVGA GTX1080
  • Case
    Phanteks Evolv ATX
  • Storage
    Samsung 950Pro m.2 512GB, Crucial M500 1TB
  • PSU
    EVGA SuperNova G2 750W
  • Display(s)
    LG 34UC98
  • Cooling
    EK Custom Loop
  • Keyboard
    CM Storm QuickFire Rapid-i cherry MX blue
  • Mouse
    Corsair M65 Pro
  • Operating System
    Windows 10 Pro

Recent Profile Visitors

354 profile views
  1. I am sorry, but as per your qualifications, both Debian and CentOS are server. Please explain to me if I do a standard minimal/net install for both distributions what in those installs qualifies that install to be a server? Or a desktop for that matter? There is nothing on them that lets me use it as either in that state. That whole premise that because a distribution is focused on stability instead of bleeding edge or maximum performance it is either server or desktop oriented is total nonsense. It is just a preference. Some people want to have the latest and greatest with the highest possible performance, other people want to just get work done and not have any downtime because downtime costs more money than a few percent extra performance can make them. Some people build a system with an unlocked i7 or i9 and overclock the snot out of it, others get a prebuild Xeon workstation with ECC memory and same day on-site service. Same thing. There simply is no such thing as a server or desktop OS in Linux-land with workarounds vs native solution for desktop use. That is just plain utter BS. It is not Windows Server, which identifies itself as server causing some client software not to install and which includes server software you cannot get rid of to turn it into a desktop. Sure, you can use Windows Server as a desktop but it is never going to be a desktop os. That is not how Linux works though. Per your logic, you have Debian as a server os, Ubuntu as a hackjob to make a desktop OS from it and now Ubuntu Server as a hackjob of a hackjob to turn it into a server os. And similarly, Fedora is a desktop OS, which gets frozen once or twice a year into commercial RHEL release magically turning it into a server, which then gets spun-off as a community supported CentOS release. It's ridiculous
  2. Really, is there such a thing as desktop or server oriented? It just depends on the packages you choose to install. Just because something leans towards stability over bleeding edge doesn't make it desktop or server. Debian stable branch is also very much oriented towards stability, but that doesn't make it a server OS. Nor does the bloated, bleeding edge style of Ubuntu make it a desktop OS. Basically you have Fedora, which is a rolling release cimmunity playground that gets turned into the RHEL commercial LTS Linux version every x period of time which gets turned into CentOS as the community derivative of the same RHEL release. Personally I have always been more Debian oriented than RedHat and I would take Debian over Ubuntu or similar any day of the week and twice on Sunday, so I very much get why someone would prefer CentOS over Fedora or Manjaro. And it ain't nothing to do with Server or Desktop. That said, if you need to use commercial, professional software you are typically forced into the RHEL camp as the OP states. But it would be a disservice to the Linux community to label perfectly great distributions as 'Server' when they work equally great on the desktop amd vv. It's just a matter of prefernce and use cases.
  3. I prefer Debian for my servers, as I prefer apt for package management and Debian is just the most stable and reliable. I vehemently dislike the fact systemd gets stuffed in everywhere these days, but what do you do. Ubuntu is just too bloated to be taken seriously and the rest is just marginal at best. I use just about everything though: Gentoo, Arch, CentOS, Slackware, derivatives of bigger distros. They all have pro's and cons. But Debian will always be my goto distro. Easy to setup and maintain, no fuzz, no frills just run and keep running. For desktop, anything with standard KDE Plasma. Yes, you can install KDE or any desktop on any Linux yourself. I do not want that. I want to install and go. Not that I generally run Linux on my desktop. I don't run OS's to play with the OS, I run an OS to use software on top of that OS and the software I need/want runs on Windows so Linux desktop is always just going to be playground stuff, nothing serious.
  4. How did you do the upgrade? As you should, using do-release-upgrade or other (manual) means? Have you tried: apt install --fix-broken? Have you tried installing the dependancy pacakge manually?
  5. While I agree users should do their own investigation and thinking first, instead of defaulting to trying to have someone else to do their thinking for them, if you can't provide a respectful means to answer questions on a forum, go away and don't linger and be an elitist. If you are on a forum long enough, all questions become repetitive and annoying. Deal with it or quit. We all started as n00bs one day and we all had the same or similar questions and were grateful if someone would take the time to help. If you can't bring yourself to return the favor and pay it forward, at the very least don't be a dick about it. Just my opinion. Can be difficult though, and admittingly I have told people to think and do their own school homework instead of asking others to provide them with ready to go answers. KISS for Arch is definitely of the technical category and not of the user experience one. It refers to unmodified upstream sources etc that keeps maintenance simple and ensures packages are working as designed. According to them. To me, it's a non issue as you need to test anyway but you do require less developers. [evil mode] almost like those annoying n00bs asking questions, just slapping packages together as is and call it a distro, without doing actual work yourself and depending on the upstream work of others. [/evil mode] That's tongue in cheek, before anyone goes over the deep end.
  6. There's nothing wrong with the diy distributions. There is everything wrong with the attitude of some people in the community of certain distributions. Just because they like to diy, doesn't mean they have to be a jerk about it when someone asks a question.
  7. Yeah, I've never understood that attitude. Personally, I don't work with the OS. It needs to boot the computer and then get out of my way so I can run the software I need to run for the tasks I want to do. It should not be a day job to get your system up and running.
  8. When I learned Linux (kernel 0.9..), dial-up was the only means to connect and paid for by the minute at least here in Europe and the whole World Wide Web wasn't exactly overflowing with Linux information. Yet, the only information you could get out of more experienced users back then was "RTFM!". I will tell you this, it was a steep learning curve but you learned a lot and you never forget. That said, come to think about it I still have nightmare about setting up a certain Teles ISDN internal card on Linux. That said, if starting with Linux I would very much use more beginner or gamer oriented (if you're into that) distros and progress from there if you they are lacking or holding you back somehow. Not Arch or Gentoo. Why torture yourself if you can learn quicker and more enjoyable by using something that is more user-friendly?
  9. That's very much true. Never stop learning. That said, I am an old UNIX guy and I run Windows. In the end it is just a GUI and a means to run the software you want to use. They're all good, they're all stable these days. Objectively, there is no good or bad just personal preference. And Windows lets me run all the software I want to use, while Linux doesn't. But! Having Linux inside my Windows through WSL let's me fall back to the commandline and do certain things faster and easier because I am so used to them there that it really gives me best of both worlds. And by using X410 I can even use the GUI software froim Linux if I want to.
  10. Yes, anything that is mounted and not explicitly excluded with the --exclude= statement will be included in the tar archive, wether is on an internal disk, external disk, or network. If it is mounted, accessible on the filesystem, it will include it. This can be good, or bad so pay attention to what you need and what you do not need.
  11. I can actually now confirm above procedure works, as I found it interesting enough to try and test my hypophysis. What I did: 1) installed Deepin Linux distribution from ISO in a virtual machine. I used Hyper-V, but it can be any or it can be installed on the physical machine. 2) after installation and initial configuration, dumped the entire system into a tar file like above. Due to the specifics of Deeping I had to include /run and /media in the excluded directories. Make sure you have enoug space to store the file on the location you are saving too. It can get quite big, depending on the size of your system. 3) ran the WSL --import with the resulting tar file from the previous step 4) fired up wsl with a fully configured and working version of Deepin Linux Including the base install of the system, the whole process took less than 30 minutes to complete. So whether you want a Linux distribution that's not available in the MS Store, you have a VM you want to run in WSL instead or even a complete running system, this is a very quick and easy way to being able to run those inside WSL and not having to dual boot to access or use certain tools/files or have the overhead of a full-blown VM. Obviously the architecture needs to match. This before anyone tries to dump his Raspberry Pi install into a tar file and attempts to run it in WSL on an x86 PC.
  12. There is no such thing as "Ubuntu Server" or Ubuntu Desktop" as such as they are different things. They are actually the same thing, but with different default packages installed to suit the specified role. It is just a name used to quickly preselect a number of packages to be installed. In the olden days, you had to go through the entire list of packages manually and select/deselect the packages you wanted to install. This was tedious, annoying and often you had to go back and fix things as you forgot something and package management wasn't exactly at the usability it is today. So to surmise, there is only one Ubuntu and it can be whatever you want. It can be a server, it can be a client, it can be a gaming pc. Or in your case, it can be a server with a desktop GUI. It's Linux. It's your choice. And whatever your choice is to install, it is right because you chose it to be.
  13. I don't get upset by internet discussions. InfoSec requires you to learn to think outside the box every time or you are not going anywhere. And using Google to find an information to come to an answer is not the same as going on a forum and asking for a solution. Sorry. Personally I would start with vi, however since cat appears to be disabled (which rbash doesn't btw, so your environment is more restricted than just rbash) you may find that not working also. However, if you read what you posted, rbash does allow you to run scripts without restrictions. Which also happens to be one of rbash greatest downsides. One that would happily be exploited by nefarious souls wanting to look at stuff they shouldn't be.
  14. Why are you asking for precooked answer when you are trying to achieve something? The whole point of exercises like this is to learn something. What exactly are you going to lean from somebody else doing the work for you? Exactly zip, nada, nothing. This is not rocket science and there are multiple clues provided in the limited information you posted. I'm sure there are more in the stuff you didn't post. Read it, digest it, read it again if need be, experiment and learn. You'll figure it out. But please don't go asking others to solve your tasks for you. Keep in mind that the more you need to think to solve a problem, the more you are actually learning. You don't learn from easy questions that take no effort to solve.
  15. You are right that it is highly unlikely you will get there by job hopping. Your only chance is to get there by working your ass off and getting promoted to that level and then maybe switch sideways to the same level at a different company. This is why it takes so much longer and you may not get to the level you could have as you run out of time for retirement.