Search Results for 'chown'

[Member RJP]

dukester wrote:

Another issue popped up – I think as a result of running:

sudo chown -Rc $USER:$USER $HOME

Some things in Control Center will not launch now. Like:

system/Edit Config files
system/Set Date and Time
Maintenance/Boot Repair
Maintenance/Menu Editor
etc

If that happens, the question is that who is whoami and who owns the files. Some checks:

whoami
pwd
find $HOME ! -user $USER -type f
ls -laR

[Member sybok]

In order to be able to run programs with|requiring elevated privileges, you should be (‘root’ or) a member of ‘sudo’ (or you should have edited the ‘sudoers’ file).
The groups and their members are listed in ‘/etc/group’, to quickly get your username from it, you may simply grep it (run as a normal user):
grep $(whoami) /etc/group

Some of the items in the Control centre require elevated privileges.
If you did run e.g. ‘sudo’ in the past 10 or 15 minutes, then during this period, you need not to reenter the password as the elevated privileges have a timeout.
Could it be that you did not need to do password confirmation in the past and now you are surprised you have to?

I doubt the recursive ‘chown’ command would affect that if called with correct values (perhaps, it’s the environment again).
You can test if there is any difference by running:
sudo echo "Normal: User [$USER] with home [$HOME]"; sudo -E echo "With Env: User [$USER] with home [$HOME]";
If both values of $USER and $HOME agree in the two variants, then I do not see any reason for the ‘chown’ to have messed up anything.

PS: Once the thread is done, please ask an admin (via PM) to mark this thread as solved. If there are any other posts you created in the past and are resolved and not marked accordingly, please include them in your polite request.

[Member dukester]

Another issue popped up – I think as a result of running:

sudo chown -Rc $USER:$USER $HOME

Some things in Control Center will not launch now. Like:

system/Edit Config files
system/Set Date and Time
Maintenance/Boot Repair
Maintenance/Menu Editor
etc

I was in the “wheel” group. How do I check if I still am?

--
dukester

[Member dukester]

Thx RJP! Ran chown as suggested!

gksu synaptic

Failed to initialize GTK.

Probably you’re running Synaptic on Wayland with root permission.
Please restart your session without Wayland, or run Synaptic without root permission

--
dukester

[Member RJP]

Graphical applications should not run with sudo, because it messes privileges. Use gksu instead of sudo.

To fix privileges run

sudo chown -Rc $USER:$USER $HOME

… after that try to open Synaptic

gksu synaptic

Check also if there is enough room

df -h / /home

• This reply was modified 1 week, 6 days ago by RJP.
• This reply was modified 1 week, 6 days ago by RJP.
• This reply was modified 1 week, 6 days ago by RJP.

[Member Robin]

rokytnji wrote:

Permission denied

Was why sudo was needed. /usr/local/bin files are not user writeable
…

Hope that the above explains this.

The files in /usr/local/bin are not involved in menu creation at all. So this actually doesn’t explain it.

Please try instead:

chown root:users /usr/share/desktop-menu/.*/menu-applications
chmod 664 /usr/share/desktop-menu/.*/menu-applications

(quoted from Dave’s posting)

For some unknown reason sometimes the permission of these files are changed, and then the error LeadFarmer describes shows up. After this happens you always need sudo for updating the menu, until you restore the original permissions as described above to the files. Then no sudo is needed again anymore for desktop-menu write-out-global.

This should also restore the refresh menu entry in the main menu working again.

I wonder, since we had written and tested a fixed version of desktop-menu a year ago already for antiX 19, but the fixes obviously didn’t make their way into the antiX repos until now, not in antiX 21 and not in 22. Also all translations we have done meanwhile are still ignored by the version recently still used by antiX, even in antiX 23 beta.

Windows is like a submarine. Open a window and serious problems will start.

[Member scruffyeagle]

For chmod, I read the manual page, and then used the command:
‘chmod -v a+rwx ./”220404 – Current budgeting.ods”‘

The results was:
“mode of ‘./220404 – Current budgeting.ods’ changed from 0700 (rwx——) to 0777 (rwxrwxrwx)”

Note: Checking the permissions dialog box for this file in zzz-fm, there was no change.

Tested making the link:
‘ln -v ./”220404 – Current budgeting.ods” ./Budgeting’

The result was the same:
“ln: failed to create hard link ‘./Budgeting’ => ‘./220404 – Current budgeting.ods’: Operation not permitted”

NOTE: Just to be sure, I repeated all of the above while logged into the terminal as root.
The results were precisely the same, including the claim that 0700 had changed to 0777. Therefore, even though the output claimed it had been changed the first time, it either had NOT been changed, or it was immediately changed back to 0700.
==================

For chgrp, I used the command:
‘chgrp -v spirit “220404 – Current budgeting.ods”‘

The result was:
“group of ‘220404 – Current budgeting.ods’ retained as spirit”
===========================

For chown, I used the command:
‘chown -v spirit:spirit “220404 – Current budgeting.ods”‘

The result was:
“ownership of ‘220404 – Current budgeting.ods’ retained as spirit:spirit”
==========================

From all of the above, I deduce that the owner & group of the file is as it should be, but the attributes of rwx were NOT fixed to include group & others.

Note, that all of the files & directories on the drive have the same set of permissions right now, where only the use may read, write, or execute the files.

The only other thing I can think of at the moment, that could be obstructing link making, is if the entire drive was marked as read only – but if that was the case, then how could I be editing the files on the drive, &/or adding & removing files? (And yes, I can edit, add, & delete files.)

[Member scruffyeagle]

sybok wrote:

Could you try attempt to create the symbolic link with ‘ln’ and increased verbosity, i.e. ‘ln –verbose’?
Perhaps, that could give more information about the failure.

If you think that is a reasonable course of action, you also try to change group, ownership and access rights recursively using ‘chgrp -R’, ‘chown -R’ and ‘chmod -R’.

If this does not help, then I do not know.

One things at a time… First, I tried to make the link. I used the following command:
ln -v ./"220404 - Current budgeting.ods" ./Budgeting

The return was:
“ln: failed to create hard link ‘./Budgeting’ => ‘./220404 – Current budgeting.ods’: Operation not permitted”

Next, I’ll see what I can do with the chown, chgrp, & chmod” commands. As a matter of “KISS”, I’ll worry about making the changes recursive later. For the moment, I need to succeed with at least one solitary file.

[Member sybok]

Could you try attempt to create the symbolic link with ‘ln’ and increased verbosity, i.e. ‘ln –verbose’?
Perhaps, that could give more information about the failure.

If you think that is a reasonable course of action, you also try to change group, ownership and access rights recursively using ‘chgrp -R’, ‘chown -R’ and ‘chmod -R’.

If this does not help, then I do not know.

[Member RJP]

For me that looks that you have messed privileges on your $HOME. The fix goes like.
sudo chown -Rc $USER:$USER $HOME

[Member Xunzi_23]

Hi Brian,
been running the portable UngoogledChromium on antiX23 testing setup for weeks now,
writing this post with the setup.

https://ungoogled-software.github.io/ungoogled-chromium-binaries/releases/linux_portable/64bit/

Update to 111 version may take a little while, seems not urgent as no exploit fixes included.
The big difference to the deb from berkley4 is that the portable version has bromite fixes fully
included. That is problematic code is removed before compiling the binary which leads to an improved
resistence to tampering with settings.

I put the contents of portable download in /opt/UngoogledChromium
No version number so just renew content of folder when updating

How to set up the SUID sandbox:
1. Rename “chrome_sandbox” to “chrome-sandbox”
2. Set the file mode to 4755 sudo chmod 4755 chrome-sandbox
3. Set the group to root sudo chown :root chrome-sandbox

Make chrome-wrapper executable I use right click with rox then set from the menu item

Make a personal starter using the control center menu tool, Enjoy.

The DEB package from berkley4 installed no errors on a fully updated antiX 22, including
drivers sandbox etc. Once I got a clean boot that is. Kernel 5.10 is on my worst ever list.

I was caught by a hybrid antiX 23 lookalike yesterday, really funny. Mix of 22 and sid.

[Moderator Brian Masinick]

Regarding post #101613 concerning zzzFM opening all the time, I looked in the zzzFM manual and found these words near the bottom in reference to the behavior of udevil.

“Set SUID

After installing udevil, /usr/bin/udevil should have the suid bit already set. If not, set it like this:

sudo chown root:root /usr/bin/udevil
sudo chmod u+s,go-s,ugo+x /usr/bin/udevil
ls -l /usr/bin/udevil
-rwsr-xr-x 1 root root 226625 May 22 08:13 /usr/bin/udevil

OR, to restrict execution of udevil to the ‘plugdev’ group only:

sudo chown root:plugdev /usr/bin/udevil
sudo chmod u+s,go-s,o-x /usr/bin/udevil
ls -l /usr/bin/udevil
-rwsr-xr– 1 root plugdev 226625 May 22 08:13 /usr/bin/udevil

OR, if you don’t want to use udevil for mounting, you can unset suid:

sudo chown root:root /usr/bin/udevil
sudo chmod ugo-s,ugo+x /usr/bin/udevil
ls -l /usr/bin/udevil
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 226625 May 22 08:13 /usr/bin/udevil

You can also limit users and groups by editing /etc/udevil/udevil.conf”
zzzFM manual at file:///usr/share/doc/zzzfm/zzzfm-manual-en.html#udevil-and-devmon

--
Brian Masinick

[Member slidesinger]

Backup ~./icewm

$ mv .icewm icewm.{date}

cp or tar or rsync files from /etc/skel I used rsync.

$ rsync -av –progress /etc/skel/.icewm/ /home/{user}/.icewm/

You may have to change ownership as well:

$ chown {user}: /home/{user}/.icewm/

Logout and login, that should fix applications menu gone in icewm. It would probably work for other wms as well, but I did not test this.

While following up on the post from Mr John Biles regarding legacy OS I stumbled on a Puppy forum post.
Un-Googled Chromium ‘portable’ – now at v108.0.5359.98 Post by mikewalsh
https://www.forum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic.php?t=1499&sid=2f34c88d5519d5fb8ab11327c2619b73

This build, in addition to including all the VAAPI, hardware acceleration stuff OOTB, also includes WideVine as standard.
The developer, “Marmaduke”, has built this along the same principles as most of the ‘clone’ devs…..against very much older
dependencies, unlike ‘vanilla’ Chromium (which is always built against the very newest of everything).

The build runs fine on my antiX box, interesting for some may be that it is built on older libs.
There have been past reports that some had troubles on older systems.
As usual need to rename sandbox
chmod it to 4755
chown it to :root
Launch using the chrome-wrapper script found in the chromium folder.

EDIT: you can launch chrome binary directly.
Useful flags for some:
–aggressive-cache-discard
–disable-cache
–disable-application-cache
–disable-offline-load-stale-cache
–disk-cache-size=0
using multiple prefixing to start the browser kills chrome caching completely.

Nice chrome flags cheat sheet
https://kapeli.com/cheat_sheets/Chromium_Command_Line_Switches.docset/Contents/Resources/Documents/index

I have not messed with the menu add script for puppy, fear it might cause breakage on my installed setup

Download link taken from the Puppy forum page is below

https://mega.nz/folder/jXhVkYjB#Pz2plOQjETINrYv9coT7KQ

May give an opportunity to make UngoogledChromium install and maintenance easier,its easy for me, not for new users.
The single version displayed at the download location looks favorable for a scripted download using wget then
script to install to /opt. Part I have not figured out is extending a basic script with starter addition to
personal menu and toolbar. Will keep trying…

• This topic was modified 4 months, 1 week ago by Xunzi_23.

[Moderator Brian Masinick]

Since your home directory is /home/stevesr0, I wonder what would happen if you:

1) Change the file and directory permissions to stevesr0, for instance: sudo chown stevesr0:stevesr0 /run/user/1000
2) Change /run/user/1000 to /run/user/stevesr0

First, would it work, and second, would the /run/user/1000 instances continue to reappear?
Worth a try; let us know if this makes any difference or if it’s ignored.

--
Brian Masinick