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 Wed 16 Apr 2014, 15:56
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Announcements
Distrowatch reviews Puppy 525
Moderators: Flash, Ian, JohnMurga
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 1 of 5 [70 Posts]   Goto page: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
Author Message
Lobster
Official Crustacean


Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 15117
Location: Paradox Realm

PostPosted: Mon 18 Apr 2011, 05:37    Post subject:  Distrowatch reviews Puppy 525  

http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20110418#feature
_________________
Puppy WIKI
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
cthisbear

Joined: 29 Jan 2006
Posts: 3250
Location: Sydney Australia

PostPosted: Mon 18 Apr 2011, 06:44    Post subject:  

Ah! yes.

I have just read another enlightened review from Professor Prat
aka .. Robert Storey.

It comes with the >> Feature Story >> banner.
More like the Creature Feature.

So many sound samples am I tempted to post back from my
mate....Richard Connolly.

And here is another twat...number 4 post.

" Puppy and root priviledges (by Stuart )
I would like to try a distribution like Puppy, but using root
priviledges shows an incredible lack of security awareness.

Does anyone know of similar, but more competent distributions? "

But the strangest part of all is that at the bottom of the same page
there is this gem.
Looks like nobody read up...oldie but goldie.

" It is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to
open it and remove all doubt. (Mark Twain) "

Chris.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Lobster
Official Crustacean


Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 15117
Location: Paradox Realm

PostPosted: Mon 18 Apr 2011, 07:21    Post subject:  

Quote:
I enjoy Puppy too, and it's what I run exclusively on my netbook


I think it is a useful review pointing out many areas where we can improve. Puppy was never designed to be a full distro. That Puppy is moving up to that status shows how flexible and organic Puppy is. Having recently done a frugal install on a second machine, many of the difficulties pointed out were similar to my own experience. It is years since putting Puppy on hard disk and most distros have very simple installation procedures.

Considerable work has gone into this review and it is probably the most comprehensive I have read.

Quickpet is not as comprehensive as the Ubuntu alternative, even though we are attempting a high degree of compatibility. Most users are not able or willing to deal with dependencies.

The potential problems of flash and javascript access to our media are fair comments as these are the vulnerabilities in Linux phones and other distros.

I would like to see more such comprehensive evaluations and considered suggestions.

Basic facts shoul have been checked eg the first paragraph
Quote:
Puppy Linux - the brainchild of Australian developer Barry Kauler - first made its appearance in 2006


Puppy first made its appearance in 2003
http://pupweb.org/wikka/HistoryPuppy

_________________
Puppy WIKI

Last edited by Lobster on Sun 24 Apr 2011, 21:28; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
rcrsn51


Joined: 05 Sep 2006
Posts: 8547
Location: Stratford, Ontario

PostPosted: Mon 18 Apr 2011, 09:43    Post subject:  

Here is what I have never understood about the "running as root is bad" argument. If, as an Ubuntu user, I can routinely give myself privilege elevation with the sudo command, what's to prevent a malicious script from doing the same thing?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
bugman


Joined: 20 Dec 2005
Posts: 2131
Location: buffalo commons

PostPosted: Mon 18 Apr 2011, 10:50    Post subject:  

rcrsn51 wrote:
Here is what I have never understood about the "running as root is bad" argument. If, as an Ubuntu user, I can routinely give myself privilege elevation with the sudo command, what's to prevent a malicious script from doing the same thing?


sudo asks for a password

_________________
. . . the machines are clean
and the machines are not corrupted


- lee "scratch" perry
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
rcrsn51


Joined: 05 Sep 2006
Posts: 8547
Location: Stratford, Ontario

PostPosted: Mon 18 Apr 2011, 11:01    Post subject:  

bugman wrote:
sudo asks for a password

That makes sense. I guess that whenever I messed around with Ubuntu Live CDs, I never saw that happening.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Jasper


Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 1031
Location: England

PostPosted: Mon 18 Apr 2011, 11:06    Post subject:  

Hi,

On the one hand it seems (to me) that 'buntu must be more secure than Puppy, but on the other hand Puppy is so much easier and more convenient and since I have no quotes of problems with either 'buntu or Puppy (unlike Windows) my choice is Puppy.

My regards

PS I have read that RootKits have been a problem for 'buntu and since there are Linux AntiRootKit programs I presume that Puppy is also at risk especially as these programs do not have the highest of reputatations?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Luluc


Joined: 16 Mar 2011
Posts: 200

PostPosted: Mon 18 Apr 2011, 11:58    Post subject:  

Several flaws in that review. And no comment section. Meh. Waste of time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Bernie_by_the_Sea


Joined: 09 Feb 2011
Posts: 329

PostPosted: Mon 18 Apr 2011, 12:20    Post subject:  

I think this is a fair review and much more comprehensive than most. The author made two comments without explanation:

Quote:
Though you can run it as a live CD, you'll get more functionality by installing it.

Quote:
Another option is whether or not you wish to do a "frugal" or "full" install. If you're installing on a hard drive, I'd suggest "full."

What more functionality? Personally I think a full install is a mistake unless one has a very hardware-limited machine which the reviewer didn’t have.

As always we have the matter of running as root:

Quote:
Furthermore, the wisdom of running as root continues to haunt Puppy. In this era of online shopping and online banking, users expect ironclad security, and it should not require command-line hacks to get it. Discussion of this issue often gets heated, even rabid, turning into an all-consuming flamefest at times. I wish people wouldn't get so emotional about it, but it is what it is. I don't expect the raging debate to end any time soon.

Running as root, or spot, or Buntu Dummy, or Joe Blow, what more security for online shopping and online banking does one need other than secure HTTPS connections? What is feared? Keyloggers reporting back to the Mother Ship? The three banks I use regularly plus PayPal and my credit card companies guarantee no loss from using their online services. They don't care whether I'm using Linux or Windows or running without a firewall or running as root. One bank won't let me use Opera but that's okay since Opera can lie and say she's Firefox.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
2byte

Joined: 09 Oct 2006
Posts: 357

PostPosted: Mon 18 Apr 2011, 12:21    Post subject:  

I thought it was a fair assessment of Puppy, one of the best ones I have seen anyway. I have used Puppy 4 series since 2008 in my daily office work and have had great success with it running as root.

Until recently that is. I installed 5.11 in the boss's computer to replace his overly aggravating XP. He loved it. The trouble began when he started sharing files on the company samba server. You guessed it, file owner and group permissions. Regardless of how you log in to the server, created files have incorrect ownership and permissions. Before anyone mentions it, there are restrictions on the server for users and groups that will not be changed. Period.

Yes I know, Puppy is not really intended for this scenario, but, and it's a big BUT IMHO, a full non-root user, not spot, is the main thing holding Puppy back. And no, PG's mods to 4.21 do not get the job done.

I truly don't understand why multiuser cannot be implemented when other tiny distros manage to do so. It wouldn't be the end of the world for Puppy. Quite the opposite I would think.

_________________

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


Joined: 16 Mar 2011
Posts: 200

PostPosted: Mon 18 Apr 2011, 12:26    Post subject:  

Well, if "the rest of the world" uses ordinary, unprivileged users instead of root, we should definitely do the same.

No, wait! "The rest of the world" uses Windows. Let's all use Windows then.

Case closed.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Bligh

Joined: 08 Jan 2006
Posts: 484
Location: California

PostPosted: Mon 18 Apr 2011, 12:33    Post subject:  

I tend to disregard dw reviews, I have my own reviews of which distro's work for me. I can't remember how I first became aware of Puppy but it was b4 06. It has a number of advantages which don't seem to be found in other distro's.
Cheers
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
nooby

Joined: 29 Jun 2008
Posts: 10514
Location: SwedenEurope

PostPosted: Mon 18 Apr 2011, 12:52    Post subject:  

Guys don't kill me now. I am just friendly rambling a bit.

I think it was rather nice. It tried to be fair about the root thing.

What I missed most in his review was how good it is to do a frugal install instead of a full install.
Like so many other linux users they seems to hate being frugal installed. Is it the word frugal that sound a bit like being unexperienced or something? Noob and frugal seems related Smile

And a very naive comment from myself. If TCL manage to have nonroot users and only using 11MB or so. How much would a non-root user take to be implemented?

Even more naive. Why can one not have a portable sfs or TCZ non-root thing and add that one to Puppy? Like any other app? Smile

Okay I spell it out instead of hide it. Could one not take TCL and make a puppy out of it. To do a remix that look exactly like puppy and have the same features as puppy and boot in RAM like puppy does and so on. Then one would get multiuser and none would see any difference at all? And RobertS would be happy and everybody would be happy. I mean a lot of people make Ubuntu and other Linux distros to look like MsWindows XP or Vista or Win7 and there are at least three puppy that do that.

So why not go the other root. We use the TCL iso and then remix it to be a clone layer of puppy one layer above the TCL layer that is only 11MB or so. Then we get a puppy that is well under 100MB too.

No they don't like me at the TCL forum I am too naive and not getting TCL well enough to use it without being hand fed.

_________________
I use Google Search on Puppy Forum
not an ideal solution though
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
2byte

Joined: 09 Oct 2006
Posts: 357

PostPosted: Mon 18 Apr 2011, 13:16    Post subject:  

nooby wrote:
If TCL manage to have nonroot users and only using 11MB or so. How much would a non-root user take to be implemented?
My point exactly. I have read all about why it's OK ( and not ) to run Puppy as root. What I have never seen discussed is why not have full non-root users in Puppy.

Nooby, you can modify TCL to be similar to Puppy. Meaning it can be made to boot from grub or CD and use a persistent save file on Linux and ntfs partitions, but this is not the place to discuss that. And neither is the TCL forum Wink

_________________

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

Joined: 29 Jun 2008
Posts: 10514
Location: SwedenEurope

PostPosted: Mon 18 Apr 2011, 13:24    Post subject:  

If it is possible to do then we would be able to give the critics a puppy that have what they want and we would still have many other puppies as we want them to be? Everybody would be satisfied.

And that was what the Review was about to point out the good things and the bad things. Okay one could talk about it in truly off topic I don't mind. But it relevant for the comment he made.

_________________
I use Google Search on Puppy Forum
not an ideal solution though
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 5 [70 Posts]   Goto page: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Announcements
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: 0.0809s ][ Queries: 12 (0.0042s) ][ GZIP on ]