|
Not those characters specifically, but I do have some non-alphanumeric characters...but nothing that would even be rejected as part of a filename.
englebart wrote: The setup might be collecting info into a template that barfs when it tries to read it back.
I suppose if the installer is using one validation routine, but the login code uses something that's not 100% identical...that could mess things up? But you'd think this sort of thing would've been found/fixed - my password isn't that sophisticated...but who knows.
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: Am I losing my mind?
Yes
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Well...that was a rhetorical question. And I kinda already knew the answer to it. 
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, for a real reply. Just assuming you're installing a distro that gets a GUI going by default.
If that's the case, then reboot into the console or single user mode if you know the root password. The switch user (su) command can be use for more than just root access. So, try something like this:
Quote: su - user2
If you can't login that way, there's a problem with your password.
And if that's the case, what you can do to make sure it's not the install process is create a second user after a fresh install and before you reboot. See if you can login with that user instead afterwards. If you can, then maybe the install process messed something up.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
The problem is that the distro doesn't prompt you to create a root account and doesn't document what the default root password might be. Going through the entire installation process, I'm only ever prompted to create one set of credentials. Since those are no good, after a reboot...I'm basically completely locked out.
|
|
|
|
|
If that's the case, I'm willing to bet (hoping to bet) the install puts the default account as a sudoer. So, you should be able to run sudo su without needing the root password, to gain root access.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
...right? But if I can't even reach a command prompt (because I have to login), how would I run sudo su at all?
|
|
|
|
|
You don't have access to the machine before the reboot? What distro is this?
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: You don't have access to the machine before the reboot? What distro is this?
Not sure if I've explained this right.
Clean hard drive, I boot from an ISO, and run the distro's installer. At some point, it'll ask you for credentials, and it creates that account. You're not prompted to supply a password for the root account. That means the distro creates the account you've just supplied credentials for as part of the sudoers list.
Finish the install, reboot, you have to supply credentials to login. That's when the password I had initially supplied is simply not recognized. Can't reach a command prompt to run sudo or anything else.
The laptop I was tinkering with was running some instance of Fedora at one point. Then it was running Zorin. Then (and this is where I did my tinkering last week) I installed Lubuntu. They all had the same problem.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't use any Ubuntu variants, but what happens if you install Debian directly without the GUI installer, using the ncurses installer? Never once ran into that issue with Debian, so if you do then there's gotta be another reason than the install process.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: if you install Debian directly without the GUI installer, using the ncurses installer?
I'm just a guy who happens to tinker with Linux every once in a while, by booting from the ISO and following the prompts on the pretty wizard screens. If I have to get my hands more dirty than this, this early in the process, it's not likely to be a distribution I'll be spending time with.
I mean, I've installed plenty of Debian versions, and derivates of it, but "without the GUI installer, using the ncurses installer", is mostly gobbledygook to me. I'm not that dedicates to it, and I'm happy for now with my solution...
I do appreciate the suggestions however.
|
|
|
|
|
We've all heard of application "bloat". What we're seeing now is starvation.
I would sometimes watch my users in action and see them using my app in ways I had not anticipated; like "multiple concurrent sessions".
In the pursuit of "the one and only app", one person thinks they know what everyone wants and needs, and in the process is eliminating "features" that certain groups found useful, but that would never dawn on said former person; in fact, said person considers said feature a "personal" problem.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
It depends I guess, would rather have a "starvation" app that just works than one with all kinds of bells and whistles that are buggy.
Doing a lot of starvation thingies for our application that has lots of features that are hard or impossible to implement in .NET 6.
|
|
|
|
|
But... surely you're not implying that the latest version of .Net is harder to code, or less functional, than earlier versions??  
|
|
|
|
|
Yep, I find it harder because I'm responsible for packaging everything so users can install it easily and it is often a complete mystery what runtime flavors need to be installed for instance. I often think back how easy things were with .NET 4.8. I have to admit that our main application is a complex mish-mash of more than 150 projects with C++, C#, lots of NuGet and 3rd-Party libraries.
A lot of time and effort already has been invested in the upgrade from .NET 4.8 to .NET 6 and some colleagues naively thought it was nearly completed proclaiming: "it runs on my machine". But sadly we still have a long and painful way to go before things can be installed properly and testing has completed.
|
|
|
|
|
...where you can specify the date and time to send a message.
Snazzy! I can send messages when I'm not working. People will think I'm working!
[edit]Doesn't work with the web version of Teams. I just get the standard browser right-click popup menu. Bummer.[/edit]
|
|
|
|
|
All this technology, and we end up using it to randomly interject with a "yes, dear"
|
|
|
|
|
I'll send you a message about that.... later.
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
Procrastinators of the world, unite!
(When you get around to it...)
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
I'll add it to my list
// TODO: Insert something here Top ten reasons why I'm lazy
1.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm so lazy that I defer even procrastination.
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, that is a standard function in X.400 email, and one of the reasons why the X.400 standard prevailed in some commercial contexts quite for quite long.
Note that in X.400, there is a well defined separation between the end user (either as sender or as recipient) and the mail transfer network. If you specified a delivery time for a message, it was sent to the recipient's 'local post office' immediately, or as soon as possible, but held back there until the specified time, at which it was put into the mailbox.
If the mail transfer was slow or unreliable (as it often was, 35-40 years ago), this would ascertain that the message was delivered on time, which could be of great legal importance in e.g. bidding processes or anything with a deadline (there was also a function for cancelling a message before the specified delivery time; this was also considered an essential function from a legal point of view), information that for legal reasons should be held back until a certain time, etc.
I believe that in the days of telegrams, delivered to your doorstep, you could also specify a delivery time. E.g. your 'Congratulations!' to a marrying couple would be delivered during the wedding dinner, to be read out loud to all the guests.
Another X.400 function of essential legal importance was non-repudiation: When the mail transport service put the message in the recipient's mailbox, it could return to the sender a proof that the message had been delivered, and the delivery time, so that the recipient couldn't deny knowledge of, say, your bid before the deadline. Also, you could request that the recipient's user agent reported when the recipient actually fetched the message from his mailbox (although for most legal purposes, the time when the message was made available to him, in his mailbox, was probably more significant).
This non-repudiation was also an essential reason why telex/teletext lived so long: It served as proof that an offer or bid had been given at the given time. Also common to telex/teletext and X.400: The infrastructure made it very difficult to forge a sender ID.
SMTP did get a receipt confirmation function, but many years later, and as it is handled by the recipient himself, it cannot serve as proof of anything. Sender ID is as easy to forge as ever. Sometimes I am surprised that people dare to send anything of commercial/legal importance through SMTP at all ... 
|
|
|
|
|
..incoming message scheduled for: 1st april, 2525 (if man is still alive)..
"pending"
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
The 8-Bit Big Band - The Moon Theme from Duck Tales[^]
I stumbled upon The 8-Bit Big Band on Spotify last week while looking for some game soundtracks.
From their website: "The 8-Bit Big Band is a 30-65 member Jazz/Pops orchestra that formed to celebrate and realize some of the best musical themes written from various video games from all consoles!"
That sounds like exactly my cup of tea!
Their members are scattered across the world, but most live in New York City.
They play classics from Zelda, Super Mario, Final Fantasy and, obviously, the Moon Theme from Duck Tales (SNES).
I've played the game back in the day, but never made it to the moon.
The music is a game classic though, and I know and love various versions of it.
This one is exceptionally well done though 
|
|
|
|
|
Here's what surprised me: Someone published the sheet music for this - for all the various instruments in this orchestra. Pretty Cool!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
