Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

GUFW disappears then reappears in Linux Mint


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 Achaemenid

Achaemenid

  • Members
  • 431 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:02:18 AM

Posted 19 September 2017 - 02:02 PM

I have looked in Software Manager for ufw, gufw, and for firewall.  Software Manager showed nothing. 

 

I opened the terminal and typed

 

sudo apt-get install ufw

 

and .... gufw

 

but terminal says ufw "command now found."

 

Linux is supposed to know what gufw or ufw are. How could the terminal behave like that?

 

Then, as soon as I came here and began to post this I went back to Software Mgr and gufw reappeared.

 

Since gufw is not internet based, how could a program not appear in Software Mgr or Terminal then reappear?



BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 The-Toolman

The-Toolman

  • Members
  • 1,414 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:01:18 PM

Posted 19 September 2017 - 07:40 PM

Open the terminal and copy and paste this command.

 

sudo ufw enable

 

Then press enter.

 

Then type in your password and press enter. (password will remain invisible)

 

Copy and paste this command.

 

sudo ufw status

 

It should say something like ufw is enabled and active.


Edited by The-Toolman, 19 September 2017 - 07:46 PM.

I'm grumpy because I can be not because I'm old.

 

The world is what you make of it, if it doesn't fit, you make alterations.

 

Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer.  (Mark Twain)


#3 pcpunk

pcpunk

  • Members
  • 6,004 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:02:18 PM

Posted 20 September 2017 - 10:12 AM

I have looked in Software Manager for ufw, gufw, and for firewall.  Software Manager showed nothing. 

Is there a reason you are looking in the Software Manager instead of the Menu?


sBCcBvM.png

Created by Mike_Walsh

 

KDE, Ruler of all Distro's

eps2.4_m4ster-s1ave.aes_pcpunk_leavemehere

 


#4 Achaemenid

Achaemenid
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 431 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:02:18 AM

Posted 25 September 2017 - 12:44 PM

 

 

Open the terminal and copy and paste this command.

 

sudo ufw enable

 

Then press enter.

 

Then type in your password and press enter. (password will remain invisible)

 

Copy and paste this command.

 

sudo ufw status

 

It should say something like ufw is enabled and active.

So, you are saying I typed in the wrong commands initially? 

 

I was putting in "sudo install ufw."

 

Now I have just used the status command and it is showing "active."


Edited by Achaemenid, 25 September 2017 - 12:45 PM.


#5 Achaemenid

Achaemenid
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 431 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:02:18 AM

Posted 25 September 2017 - 12:46 PM

 

I have looked in Software Manager for ufw, gufw, and for firewall.  Software Manager showed nothing. 

Is there a reason you are looking in the Software Manager instead of the Menu?

 

I checked in menu and software mgr.

For some reason there was a period in which ufw was invisible.



#6 The-Toolman

The-Toolman

  • Members
  • 1,414 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:01:18 PM

Posted 25 September 2017 - 02:28 PM

UFW is generally installed by default although it is not enabled.

 

As long as it shows to be active then you should be good to go.

 

And it is possible that you may have been entering the wrong terminal commands earlier since UFW is now active.


I'm grumpy because I can be not because I'm old.

 

The world is what you make of it, if it doesn't fit, you make alterations.

 

Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer.  (Mark Twain)


#7 pcpunk

pcpunk

  • Members
  • 6,004 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:02:18 PM

Posted 25 September 2017 - 02:49 PM

I have looked in Software Manager for ufw, gufw, and for firewall.  Software Manager showed nothing. 

 

I opened the terminal and typed

 

sudo apt-get install ufw

 

and .... gufw

 

but terminal says ufw "command now found."

 

Linux is supposed to know what gufw or ufw are. How could the terminal behave like that?

 

Then, as soon as I came here and began to post this I went back to Software Mgr and gufw reappeared.

 

Since gufw is not internet based, how could a program not appear in Software Mgr or Terminal then reappear?

Very Unusual for sure.  Did you check the integrity of your install Media?

 

Is your HDD in good shape, have you checked it lately for errors?

 

If your Hardware and Software is all good then just chalk it up to the Mystery of Computers, weird stuff happens all the time.

 

The only other thing would be a Typo, as we all do it from time to time.  And typing those commands are not really needed as you can use the GUI, it comes as Default with Ubuntu, and or, all the Debian based packages as far as I know.


sBCcBvM.png

Created by Mike_Walsh

 

KDE, Ruler of all Distro's

eps2.4_m4ster-s1ave.aes_pcpunk_leavemehere

 


#8 Achaemenid

Achaemenid
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 431 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:02:18 AM

Posted 27 September 2017 - 06:14 PM

 

I have looked in Software Manager for ufw, gufw, and for firewall.  Software Manager showed nothing. 

 

I opened the terminal and typed

 

sudo apt-get install ufw

 

and .... gufw

 

but terminal says ufw "command now found."

 

Linux is supposed to know what gufw or ufw are. How could the terminal behave like that?

 

Then, as soon as I came here and began to post this I went back to Software Mgr and gufw reappeared.

 

Since gufw is not internet based, how could a program not appear in Software Mgr or Terminal then reappear?

Very Unusual for sure.  Did you check the integrity of your install Media?

 

Is your HDD in good shape, have you checked it lately for errors?

 

If your Hardware and Software is all good then just chalk it up to the Mystery of Computers, weird stuff happens all the time.

 

The only other thing would be a Typo, as we all do it from time to time.  And typing those commands are not really needed as you can use the GUI, it comes as Default with Ubuntu, and or, all the Debian based packages as far as I know.

 

 

How can I check the integrity of the install media, please. 

There seem to be 3 methods of installing:

1) 2 methods when you download and save either as zip file or to Archive Manager

2) Through software manager.

 

My HDD was replaced 2-3 years ago. I have not tested it since then.  Is there a way to test the HDD in Linux?

 

The machine is from 2011, so that might be the problem.

 

There have been a few quirky things happening. LIke clicking on a minimized page that flashes open then minimizes again. That could be related to sensitivity of the mouse....?



#9 pcpunk

pcpunk

  • Members
  • 6,004 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:02:18 PM

Posted 27 September 2017 - 06:47 PM

Here is how to check the Integrity of the install media

https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Installation/CDIntegrityCheck

 

I'm not sure what you mean, installing what?

 

"smartmontools"

I don't like this tool very well, because it does not show any progress etc.  I don't have time to fool with these things.  You could boot from a Windows type tool and do it that way, but I'm not super familiar with this either.  I don't think you would be having HDD issues this early but who knows.  Here are a few Links that will show you how to use the "smartmontool".  Considering you are running Linux Alone, and not a dual boot, it may pay off to learn the smartmontools program.

"smartmontools"

Or

"smartmontools"-2

 

Here is a Link for Windows Based Tools.  Look at "SeaTools for DOS" if you want something to boot from.

 

And this

 

You machine is not all that old, but I've found lots of quirks with Mint 18.0 on various machines.


Edited by pcpunk, 27 September 2017 - 06:48 PM.

sBCcBvM.png

Created by Mike_Walsh

 

KDE, Ruler of all Distro's

eps2.4_m4ster-s1ave.aes_pcpunk_leavemehere

 


#10 Achaemenid

Achaemenid
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 431 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:02:18 AM

Posted 28 September 2017 - 12:36 PM

Here is how to check the Integrity of the install media

https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Installation/CDIntegrityCheck

 

I'm not sure what you mean, installing what?

 

"smartmontools"

I don't like this tool very well, because it does not show any progress etc.  I don't have time to fool with these things.  You could boot from a Windows type tool and do it that way, but I'm not super familiar with this either.  I don't think you would be having HDD issues this early but who knows.  Here are a few Links that will show you how to use the "smartmontool".  Considering you are running Linux Alone, and not a dual boot, it may pay off to learn the smartmontools program.

"smartmontools"

Or

"smartmontools"-2

 

Here is a Link for Windows Based Tools.  Look at "SeaTools for DOS" if you want something to boot from.

 

And this

 

You machine is not all that old, but I've found lots of quirks with Mint 18.0 on various machines.

 

I thought you meant checking the various methods of installation, but you meant the actual cd from which I installed LInux.

Thanks for these links. I have installed and run the smartmontools and so far passed the short test.

The long test should now be over according to the time it gave, but no results show in the terminal. Maybe there is another command I need to give to see the results.

I checked the Lifewire page. good info. Lifewire is a website that does not allow printing out their pages in pdf

I start shivering every time I see the word, Windows, so I avoid the Windows based tools.

On the linuxmint page it mentions a "USB adapter kit." This is the first time I have heard of this, and so far I am not sure it applies to me since my problem was on the  computer HDD.

 



#11 pcpunk

pcpunk

  • Members
  • 6,004 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:02:18 PM

Posted 28 September 2017 - 07:35 PM

Did the Integrity Check Pass?  I would have checked that first, and that is why I presented it first.  A drive test takes time, the Integrity Test takes minutes.

 

The most important, or first thing we do is check the iso download was good using the "Checksum", and the iso was complete with no damaged or incomplete files.  Then one can do the Integrity Check also, I only mentioned Integrity Test because you already had the medium created and installed, which is less complicated for some newbies than checking the iso Checksum. 

 

Method of Installation had not been mentioned as this started out being a UFW Thread.  If you want you can add method of Installation if you think that will help. 

 

Where is your iso stored, on Windows or Linux, we can check the iso if you think it is needed, that is the first thing I do when encountering strange problems.  Actually, some of us check it upon download with a download manager.  Use this for your next download:  Down Them All

Checksum in Linux with gtkhash

I really like this tool for Windows

Checksum Utility for Windows


Edited by pcpunk, 28 September 2017 - 07:37 PM.

sBCcBvM.png

Created by Mike_Walsh

 

KDE, Ruler of all Distro's

eps2.4_m4ster-s1ave.aes_pcpunk_leavemehere

 


#12 pcpunk

pcpunk

  • Members
  • 6,004 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:02:18 PM

Posted 28 September 2017 - 07:42 PM

 

I checked the Lifewire page. good info. Lifewire is a website that does not allow printing out their pages in pdf

Right Click on Page and Save as PDF, then print from there.  Or do a Toolbar Click and Print Save as PDF from there.


sBCcBvM.png

Created by Mike_Walsh

 

KDE, Ruler of all Distro's

eps2.4_m4ster-s1ave.aes_pcpunk_leavemehere

 


#13 Achaemenid

Achaemenid
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 431 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:02:18 AM

Posted 03 October 2017 - 02:51 PM

When you say right click on Page, I assume you mean just t

 

 

 

I checked the Lifewire page. good info. Lifewire is a website that does not allow printing out their pages in pdf

Right Click on Page and Save as PDF, then print from there.  Or do a Toolbar Click and Print Save as PDF from there

I assume you mean just right click on the page itself, but taking that option does not print the page.

By toolbar I assume you mean, the topmost menu in FF: File, Edit, View, etc. Clicking on File and telling it to save as... does not make a pdf either.



#14 pcpunk

pcpunk

  • Members
  • 6,004 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:02:18 PM

Posted 03 October 2017 - 03:38 PM

Sorry, I don't use Firefox, it's quite simple in Chrome.

 

Here is what I see for Firefox, and I've used this a while back.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/save-as-pdf/

Then perhaps you can print the PDF.  There are others here whom use FF, so wait for others to chime in if this don't work for you.


sBCcBvM.png

Created by Mike_Walsh

 

KDE, Ruler of all Distro's

eps2.4_m4ster-s1ave.aes_pcpunk_leavemehere

 


#15 Gary R

Gary R

    MRU Admin


  • Malware Response Team
  • 855 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:07:18 PM

Posted 04 October 2017 - 12:28 AM

Not tried this myself, but it looks as if it might be what you need .... https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/print-friendly-pdf/?src=ss






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users