Oolite Bulletins

"sudo bash" basically says - start a "bash" command window but with do it with Super User (su) permissions - therefore anything done in the bash window which is spawned from that command will have the equivalent of root permissions.

It means you don't need to keep typing in "sudo" in front of every command you want to run at root permission level, but as soon as you close the bash window - that's it - no more root permissions... (until you do it again)

I hope that helps?

Malcul wrote:

OK, DH, you got me, ... I have to ask.

How is 'sudo' different from 'sudo bash'? Is 'sudo' a temporary condition for one command, whilest 'sudo bash' is a condition until informed otherwise? ... as in while ... and ... endwhile?

Background: BASH is a shell, (Bourne Again SHell). Think of it as similar to what you would see if you opened a Terminal window in Windows using CMD. BASH scripts (.sh) are somewhat analogous to batch (.bat) scripts in Windows. BASH allows you to execute just about any and every LINUX command from within it's scripts and that is a cornerstone of UNIX and LINUX programming: building large complex programs from a number of small dedicated ones. A huge amount of what happens behind the scenes in a LINUX distro is the result of executing numerous BASH shell scripts: ie: deleting a file, renaming directories, etc. are actually shell scripts that are run by the OS, but can also be executed directly by someone with root privileges A shell script in LINUX can be executed just like a compiled program ... makes no difference to the OS.

When you log onto a LINUX distro, you are actually running a BASH shell instance as a non-root user. Root is the "Superuser", a special user account with all privileges (referred to generally as "God-like"). If you make a mistake as root, (like deleting a system file) it's more or less permanent. "sudo" allows you to temporarily become the root user (generally) and run ANY program as the superuser. This would include BASH shell scripts that are intended to keep your OS working properly. For a LINUX newbie, this is a "Bad Thing" generally as it allows you to hork up your system and break it. Read: re-install your OS.

Sorry for the long-winded explanation. I've used LINUX for about 20 years and taught it at college level for 10.

Cheers.

Yep! It is definitely not a command for a newbie. Thanks folks for the explanation. It all makes sense, and I can see how someone would want to use it. (I have dabbled in programming from Acorn BBC days to batch files on a PC but with no formal training. I'm not a programmer, but I can now re-install fairly quickly without losing stuff!)
Thanks to you both for very fast and lucid responses.

1 comment :

while bash has similarities to windows CMD ( or dos command.com), there's also a huge difference in what you can do with them.

a comparison in football terms (soccer for USA people) :

Bash plays champions league, CMD plays 2nd class amateur league

while bash has similarities to windows CMD ( or dos command.com), there's also a huge difference in what you can do with them.

Undoubtedly ... the example is simplified ...

Cheers.

First post has been updated to include instructions
on how to update your current oolite installation
to the latest oolite release without having to
download a full setup file.
Give it a try to upgrade your oolite 1.75.2 installation to 1.75.3.

Is it possible to generate this installer from a source build?

Thank you!

Well... now that I'm thinking about it... this will most probably not work.
This is because the packager, prepares a package with the libraries found in 'deps/Linux-deps/[x86, x86_64]/lib' folder,
while it uses the system's libraries to build the oolite binary.

For the moment, the way to resolve this (for the system to produce the installer),
is to build and install in the system, the exact versions distributed in the 'deps/Linux-deps/[x86, x86_64]/lib' folder.

The instructions on how to do this can be downloaded from here.

Getafix wrote:

Well... now that I'm thinking about it... this will most probably not work.
This is because the packager, prepares a package with the libraries found in 'deps/Linux-deps/[x86, x86_64]/lib' folder,
while it uses the system's libraries to build the oolite binary.

For the moment, the way to resolve this (for the system to produce the installer),
is to build and install in the system, the exact versions distributed in the 'deps/Linux-deps/[x86, x86_64]/lib' folder.

The instructions on how to do this can be downloaded from here.

Hmm, that sounds like a major undertaking, I think unless I can work around the original compiler error I might just as well give up on building and try the nightlies. . . thanks for the assistance though.

Lone_Wolf wrote:

Bash plays champions league, CMD plays 2nd class amateur league

Bash plays lingerie football. /bin/sh plays backlot rugby with a shiv tucked in its waistband. CMD plays FIFA International Soccer (1993) on a NES.

Delighted to see that 1.88 has been launched today

I appear to be having some difficulty updating from 1.86 though.

My installation is limited to a directory install so I use the command

/home/username/GNUstep/Applications/Oolite/oolite-update

Rsync completes with the following output:

Your installation will now be synchronized to the latest nightly build.
Please wait...



receiving incremental file list
uninstall
6,787 100% 6.47MB/s 0:00:00 (xfr#1, to-chk=692/694)
doc/README-PREAMBLE.TXT
159 100% 155.27kB/s 0:00:00 (xfr#2, to-chk=683/694)
oolite.app/oolite-update
4,963 100% 4.73MB/s 0:00:00 (xfr#3, to-chk=654/694)
oolite.app/oolite-wrapper
2,801 100% 2.67MB/s 0:00:00 (xfr#4, to-chk=653/694)

sent 279 bytes received 14,888 bytes 10,111.33 bytes/sec
total size is 127,515,421 speedup is 8,407.43
Your Oolite installation is already up to date.
Any missing or altered Oolite installation files have been restored.

Launching Oolite then reveals that I am still running 1.86

Can anyone tell me where I may be going wrong please?

Many thanks.

*Edit: Just read my post back and noted from the Rsync output spiel

Your installation will now be synchronized to the latest nightly build.

Can I guess / hope that the word "nightly" should maybe not appear in this instance? Or should I be worried that I have skipped from stable release onto nightly test?

Could you try again, please?

Thanks Getafix

It's now updating properly.

You know whilst I was watching Rsync do it's thing, I couldn't help but hear this cinematic classic line in my head over and over.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuoKNZjr8_U

Thanks again Getfix

Now to do some playing