Puppy Linux Discussion Forum Forum Index Puppy Linux Discussion Forum
Puppy HOME page : puppylinux.com
"THE" alternative forum : puppylinux.info
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The time now is Mon 19 Aug 2019, 23:52
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » House Training » Users ( For the regulars )
Opera will not launch due to "insufficient priviledges."
Moderators: Flash, Ian, JohnMurga
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 1 of 2 [22 Posts]   Goto page: 1, 2 Next
Author Message
kpfuser

Joined: 19 Mar 2006
Posts: 206
Location: Mt Pelion, Greece

PostPosted: Fri 10 May 2019, 17:13    Post subject:  Opera will not launch due to "insufficient priviledges."  

I installed the latest version of Opera yesterday by using the quickpet shortcut on the desktop of a xenialpup64 installation. All went well but today, after rebooting, I get the message

Can't open user profile directory, because you lack sufficient privileges. You might want to contact the administrator of this machine.

The above message repeats whether I am logged in as root or spot. This is rather unexpected as I would think that being logged in as root makes one the administrator.

Any ideas as to how to tackle this?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
s243a

Joined: 02 Sep 2014
Posts: 2031

PostPosted: Fri 10 May 2019, 17:39    Post subject: Re: Opera will not launch due to "insufficient priviledges."  

kpfuser wrote:
I installed the latest version of Opera yesterday by using the quickpet shortcut on the desktop of a xenialpup64 installation. All went well but today, after rebooting, I get the message

Can't open user profile directory, because you lack sufficient privileges. You might want to contact the administrator of this machine.

The above message repeats whether I am logged in as root or spot. This is rather unexpected as I would think that being logged in as root makes one the administrator.

Any ideas as to how to tackle this?


If your logged in as root then try starting it with the "--no-sandbox" flag. Also you can use strace to troubleshoot the startup. It's possible that some folder might have the wrong permissions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
kpfuser

Joined: 19 Mar 2006
Posts: 206
Location: Mt Pelion, Greece

PostPosted: Fri 10 May 2019, 18:20    Post subject:  

s243a,

Thank you for your reply. It does look to me too that this is probably a file permissions problem. Having said this, I must confess my ignorance with respect to how I can
Quote:
try starting it with the "--no-sandbox" flag

as well as how to
Quote:
use strace to troubleshoot the startup.

Could you please make it a little simpler for the benefit of those of us with relevant skills that are sub-par at best?

Thanks again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
s243a

Joined: 02 Sep 2014
Posts: 2031

PostPosted: Fri 10 May 2019, 18:33    Post subject:  

kpfuser wrote:
s243a,

Thank you for your reply. It does look to me too that this is probably a file permissions problem. Having said this, I must confess my ignorance with respect to how I can
Quote:
try starting it with the "--no-sandbox" flag

as well as how to
Quote:
use strace to troubleshoot the startup.

Could you please make it a little simpler for the benefit of those of us with relevant skills that are sub-par at best?

Thanks again.


I'm not in front of linux right now but you can find the startup command for the browser in the desktop file. If I recall correctly located in:
Code:

/usr/share/applications

(you can open the .desktop file as text)

Say the command to start opera is "opera" then in a terminal you can type:
Code:

opera --no-sandbopx


If that doesn't work you can tray something like this to try to trace the startup process:
Code:

strace opera --no-sandbox 2>&1 | tee opera_startup.log


and if you pick through the output you might able to spot a file or directory that doesn't have the correct permission settings.

Anyway, if Opera isn't working for you then you can try other chome based browsers such as: chrome, iron, slimjet and chromium. You'll find pets for these browsers in the following sub forum:
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/index.php?f=53

I also suggest posting your question to the Xenialpup support thread (and please link to this thread so people can see what is discussed):
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=106479

Finally if you want you can attach the output of your strace log, and we can see here if we can spot anything.

P.S. strace won't be installed. You can either install it from the package manager or load the devX sfs file.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
s243a

Joined: 02 Sep 2014
Posts: 2031

PostPosted: Fri 10 May 2019, 18:37    Post subject:  

Also please verify that you are actually root by typing the following command in the terminal:
Code:

whoami


It is possible to install puppy as a non-root user.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
Mike Walsh


Joined: 28 Jun 2014
Posts: 5261
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

PostPosted: Sat 11 May 2019, 16:11    Post subject:  

Opera is one of the very few Chromium-based browsers that I've never bothered with, with the exception of a brief test-drive a couple of years ago. It's always been a complete PITA since it went Chromium-based, due to the way the devs have coded it; it takes far more messing-about to get running than most other Chromium 'clones'.

If, however, it's like other recent 'clones', then it will probably need to be run as 'user' spot (in fact, since it's apparently 64-bit only, just like Chrome, then it's a 'given'). You don't necessarily need to run it from the spot directory, but by using the run-as-spot parameter in the exec statement it will create the user configuration file in /root/spot/.config, rather than /root/.config.

If you can let us know where the main Opera directory is installed to, I can give you an exec script to try.


Mike. Wink

_________________
MY 'PUPPY' PACKAGES

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
kpfuser

Joined: 19 Mar 2006
Posts: 206
Location: Mt Pelion, Greece

PostPosted: Sat 11 May 2019, 20:06    Post subject:  

s243a,

The command to launch opera is indeed "opera." Thus I opened a terminal window and ran the command
Code:
opera --no-sandbox

both as root as well as spot. I did in fact use 'whoami' every time to confirm that I was the user I thought I was. Unfortunately I got the same "can't open..." message as reported earlier only this time it followed several lines of utter gibberish that popped in the terminal.

At this point, prompted by some conclusions resulting from a search of the string "opera can't open..." I decided to drop this matter altogether. As this search revealed, this problem was first reported at least two years ago and Opera did not manage to find a solution or work-around. So calling on people like you to help with finding a solution is rather counter-productive especially if Opera is capable of creating similar or worse problems just out of the blue. As you said,
Quote:
Anyway, if Opera isn't working for you then you can try other chome based browsers such as...

So I decided that taking your advice was the best option available.


Mike,

Let me thank you first for enriching my vocabulary with that PITA term. Although dictionaries list different interpretations, I am quite certain as to which one applies in this case.

Furthermore, running
Code:
opera run-as-spot

if this is what you meant, produced the same final message preceded by a similar string of gibberish as mentioned earlier. Finally I cannot let you know where the main Opera directory is installed to because I am not sure about it myself. A file search for 'opera' results in a sizable listing with lines such as
/initrd/mnt/tmpfs/pup-rw/root/.packages/opera-stable-60.0.3255.83_amd64.deb
at the top. The term 'profile' is most curiously absent from each of these lines. Thus I am pushed inexorably towards making my affair with Opera as brief as yours.

Thank you both for your help!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Mike Walsh


Joined: 28 Jun 2014
Posts: 5261
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

PostPosted: Sat 11 May 2019, 21:17    Post subject:  

@ kpfuser:-

Now, then; this should solve the problem.

I built both .pet and SFS packages of Opera-60.0.3255.83 in Xenialpup64 earlier this evening. Both were tested in a clean 'install' of Xenialpup64 by adding 'pfix=ram' to the kernel line in Grub4DOS and re-booting.

Be aware that these are running as root with the '--no-sandbox' flag, so they're 'experimental' packages. Use at your own risk, though you shouldn't have any problems. I've used various Chromium clones without the sandboxing for years, and never had any issues with 'em.

You can find them at my Google Drive:-

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1XS6tw7-cjUjsi2Uzzla61VAhWzssQTIN?usp=sharing

Help yourself to whichever one you want.


Mike. Wink

_________________
MY 'PUPPY' PACKAGES

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
bigpup


Joined: 11 Oct 2009
Posts: 12449
Location: S.C. USA

PostPosted: Sat 11 May 2019, 23:02    Post subject:  

Thanks Mike Walsh!

I tried the Opera sfs package in Bionicpup64 8.0.
Seems to be working OK.

I will post a link to this in the Bionicpup64 8.0 topic.
666philb may want to use your Opera packages for what is offered in Quickpet.

The Opera offered in Bionicpup64 8.0 Quickpet has the same problem not working with errors.
Just like Xenialpup64 7.5 Quickpet.
It just goes to the normal Opera download site and gets the same Opera deb package that does not work.

_________________
The things they do not tell you, are usually the clue to solving the problem.
When I was a kid I wanted to be older.... This is not what I expected Shocked
YaPI(any iso installer) http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=107601
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Mike Walsh


Joined: 28 Jun 2014
Posts: 5261
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

PostPosted: Sun 12 May 2019, 17:11    Post subject:  

Opera packages now re-uploaded. New version has the addition of the PepperFlash 'auto-updater' script by SFS, which was modified from Geoffrey's original, amazing FlashPlayer auto-updater. Pepper now lives in its own directory in /usr/lib, and is sym-linked into /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins.

This is itself a sym-link from /usr/lib/adobe-flashplugin, which is where Opera looks for libpepflashplayer.so.

Same link as before. Help yourselves to whichever package you want.


Mike. Wink

_________________
MY 'PUPPY' PACKAGES

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
s243a

Joined: 02 Sep 2014
Posts: 2031

PostPosted: Sun 12 May 2019, 17:20    Post subject:  

Hello Mike,

I'm not sure if I did this yet but you might want to do the following:
s243a wrote:

Download the amd64 version of the package located at:
https://packages.ubuntu.com/xenial-updates/chromium-codecs-ffmpeg-extra

Extract this package using uextract. From the extracted folder copy the file
Code:

/usr/lib/chromium-browser/libffmpeg.so

to
Code:

/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/opera/libffmpeg.so

I recommend backing up the old version of libffmpeg.so

Note that I took the version from xenial because the version from bionic requires too new a version of glibc.

http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=1024766#1024766

which will allow you to play all HTML5 video formats.

You might want to try an older version of chromium-codecs-ffmpeg-extra (then I did), if you want to support older version of puppy than Xenial.

_________________
Find me on minds and on pearltrees.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
kpfuser

Joined: 19 Mar 2006
Posts: 206
Location: Mt Pelion, Greece

PostPosted: Sun 12 May 2019, 17:49    Post subject:  

Ok Mike!

Since you are making a commendable effort to get into trouble with Opera again, I will be happy to provide the impetus. It is the least I can do after your generous gesture to jump into the fray once again.So let me start at the beginning or even the very beginning as the case may be.

The link you provided to your Drive takes me to a page that contains only the .pet package. The .sfs package is nowhere in sight.

Please view the following few questions with a measure of lenience as they expose greater ignorance in puppy matters than the ignorance displayed so far. So here we go.

Will the Opera installed by either of these packages be able to be updated automatically by Mozilla or will there be a need to replace the older packages with newer versions of the same?

Next, is the
Quote:
adding 'pfix=ram' to the kernel line in Grub4DOS and re-booting

something that has been already done by you or should I do it myself? In the latter case, how exactly would I go about it?

If I opt for the .pet package, I think that after downloading it, all I have to do is open it and it will install itself in the proper place. Am I right? But what about the .sfs package? How should this be handled?

Finally, "running as root" implies to me that I should avoid messing around with anything "spot" so that I can remain "root" as I was when I logged in. As for running with the '--no-sandbox flag, I am now an expert on it after s243a initiated me into its finer aspects in one of his posts in this thread. Wink

Well, let's see what lies ahead.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Mike Walsh


Joined: 28 Jun 2014
Posts: 5261
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

PostPosted: Sun 12 May 2019, 18:33    Post subject:  

@ kpfuser:-

You probably visited the Drive link while I was in the middle of uploading the updated packages! If you re-visit the link again now, you should find the SFS package there as well. This is the best one to use, since it can be loaded/unloaded on-the-fly, and is much the easiest way to change packages.

Yes, you will need to update by changing packages.....using the method I've just mentioned. The only browsers that will update 'in place' are Mozilla-based ones; Firefox, Palemoon, and the like. Opera now belongs to the Chromium-based group of 'clones'.....none of which update themselves automatically in Linux.

The stuff about 'pfix=ram', no, you can ignore that. I merely mentioned it conversationally, just to detail how the packages were tested.

I prefer to build these packages to 'run as root' wherever possible, since it's a lot less messing about. As for running without sandboxing, well; how paranoid are you? Yes, it's supposed to be one of Chromium's major security features, yet I've run Chromium-based browsers without it enabled for years.....and have never yet come to grief. Puppy's not perfect, but it's unique mode of running alone makes it much less vulnerable to any form of attack even than other Linux distros.....which themselves are generally a lot safer to use than Windoze.

D/load the SFS package, load it in, and it should fire up from the Menu entry. You'll be good to go.


Mike. Wink

_________________
MY 'PUPPY' PACKAGES

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
s243a

Joined: 02 Sep 2014
Posts: 2031

PostPosted: Sun 12 May 2019, 20:04    Post subject:  

Mike Walsh wrote:


I prefer to build these packages to 'run as root' wherever possible, since it's a lot less messing about. As for running without sandboxing, well; how paranoid are you? Yes, it's supposed to be one of Chromium's major security features, yet I've run Chromium-based browsers without it enabled for years.....and have never yet come to grief. Puppy's not perfect, but it's unique mode of running alone makes it much less vulnerable to any form of attack even than other Linux distros.....which themselves are generally a lot safer to use than Windoze.

D/load the SFS package, load it in, and it should fire up from the Menu entry. You'll be good to go.


Mike. Wink


I actually thought that the original poster wanted to run as root but regardless of how the original poster wants run run the browser it wouldn't be hard to included multiple startup and/or .desktop scripts/files.

In the pet version it would be easy for the original poster to modify the .desktop file if he/she wanted.

_________________
Find me on minds and on pearltrees.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
Mike Walsh


Joined: 28 Jun 2014
Posts: 5261
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

PostPosted: Sun 12 May 2019, 20:24    Post subject:  

s243a wrote:
I actually thought that the original poster wanted to run as root but regardless of how the original poster wants run run the browser it wouldn't be hard to included multiple startup and/or .desktop scripts/files.

In the pet version it would be easy for the original poster to modify the .desktop file if he/she wanted.


No, absolutely; not hard at all. Oscar does this very same thing in some of his recent 'clone' packages.

The 'wrapper-script' that's needed to start these Chromium-based browsers contains a 'run-as-root' section, and a 'run-as-spot' section. You merely comment/comment out the section that you do (or don't) want to use.

Easy enough to do, though it's easier for Oscar to do this, since he primarily runs 32-bit hardware. With the 64-bit versions, it's 'run-as-spot' or nothing, since they mostly refuse to run any other way.....with the odd exception, like Opera (as I've discovered).

(I'm not entirely sure how old a version of Chromium this release of Opera is based on, since the insistence on 'running as a user' came in round about Chromium 62/63.....and we're now up to 74.)


Mike. Wink

_________________
MY 'PUPPY' PACKAGES

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 2 [22 Posts]   Goto page: 1, 2 Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » House Training » Users ( For the regulars )
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.2077s ][ Queries: 12 (0.0168s) ][ GZIP on ]