while # sudo nautilus
i get this :
root@static-16 aditya]# sudo nautilus No protocol specified Could not parse arguments: Cannot open display: [root@static-16 aditya]#
please resolve.
Also what does the "static-16" denote?
2013/12/28 aditya mamidwar aditya.mamidwar@gmail.com
while # sudo nautilus
i get this :
root@static-16 aditya]# sudo nautilus No protocol specified Could not parse arguments: Cannot open display: [root@static-16 aditya]#
please resolve.
Also what does the "static-16" denote?
static-16 is hostname of your computer. you need to use command like gksudo nautilus or kdesu nautilus, because of X access control.
-- Eero
On Sat, 28 Dec 2013 20:19:21 +0530 aditya mamidwar wrote:
root@static-16 aditya]# sudo nautilus No protocol specified Could not parse arguments: Cannot open display:
http://www.thegeekstuff.com/2010/06/xhost-cannot-open-display/
Also what does the "static-16" denote?
Hostname of your server up to the first . You can see, set or change that with the $PS1 variable.
2013/12/28 Frank Cox theatre@melvilletheatre.com
On Sat, 28 Dec 2013 20:19:21 +0530 aditya mamidwar wrote:
root@static-16 aditya]# sudo nautilus No protocol specified Could not parse arguments: Cannot open display:
http://www.thegeekstuff.com/2010/06/xhost-cannot-open-display/
xhost + is very dangerous way to do that as it allows all clients to connect to display(s)
-- Eero
On 12/28/2013 08:09, Eero Volotinen wrote:
xhost + is very dangerous way to do that as it allows all clients to connect to display(s)
"Dangerous" depends on your local trust model.
Back when I was new to Unix -- a couple of decades ago, before widespread firewalls and such -- we tended to trust LAN users implicitly. That level of trust allowed some nice features that we've had to give up in this more hostile modern world.
There once was a fun program you could run on a lab full of X Window terminals or workstations that would march an Energizer Bunny from one screen to the next, along the bottom edge of the screen. Can't do that kind of thing now, thanks to security killjoys and the bad actors that create jobs for them.
Two decades later, we're contemplating encrypting everything to the Nth degree purely because there is so much mistrust -- and good reason for that mistrust -- in the world.
This is an improvement?
"Dangerous" depends on your local trust model.
It was long before NSA times .. :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0w36GAyZIA
-- Eero