Re: still fixing stuff the upgrade broke...

[Brad Rogers]

On Thu, 6 Jan 2022 01:01:07 -0500
"Roy J. Tellason, Sr."  wrote:

Hello Sr.,

> (Why the repository can't be more up to date than that I don't know.) 

Because, by the sound of things, you're using at least old-stable, which
won't get many, if any, updates.  Maybe the odd security bug fix.
Anything EOL won't get any updates at all.

-- 
 Regards  _
 / )  "The blindingly obvious is never immediately apparent"
/ _)rad   "Is it only me that has a working delete key?"
Early morning when I wake up, I look like Kiss but without the make up
Strong - Robbie Williams


pgpcclV6hh4MI.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Thunderbird not allowing local accounts

[Brad Rogers]

On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 12:33:36 -0800
cono...@rahul.net (John Conover) wrote:

Hello John,

>Yea, and claws-mail is not compatible with Gmail's oauth2, which is

Many CM users are successfully collecting mail from google using oauth2.

-- 
 Regards  _
 / )  "The blindingly obvious is never immediately apparent"
/ _)rad   "Is it only me that has a working delete key?"
I must be hallucinating, watching angels celebrating
There Must Be An Angel (Playing With My Heart) - Eurythmics


pgpCkH4mkwxAP.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Adobe Digital Editions - No consegueixo reinstalar-lo

[xavi]

Doncs jo estaria interessat també en el guió del calibre... si m'ho pots enviar 
per privat ;)

x.

El 5 de gener de 2022 23:11:49 CET, "Julio Amorós" 
 ha escrit:
>Hola,
>ja sé que faig tard però he fet un guió per instal·lar ADE a Debian 11.
>https://gitlab.com/pingui/deb-at-inf/-/blob/master/Debian11/HowTo/ADE.md
>
>De fet, vaig continuar amb calibre i els plugins per treure el DRM d'un
>llibre electrònic que vaig comprar, però no sé si estaria bé penjar el
>guió
>també :)
>Vagi bé,
>Julio
>
>Missatge de Narcis Garcia  del dia dt., 30 de
>nov.
>2021 a les 13:21:
>
>> Jo normalment faig servir PlayOnLinux per aquesta mena
>d'instal·lacions,
>> ja que POL utilitza Wine dins de «contenidors»: Et crea un «Wine
>prefix»
>> que implica fer un subdirectori com a «arrel de Windows» dedicat en
>> exclusiva a l'aplicació que prepares.
>> Això va molt bé per a separar aplicacions, versions, fer còpia de
>> seguretat, i també fer net quan en descartes una.
>>
>> El projecte està molt poc mantingut, però funciona:
>> www.playonlinux.com
>>
>>
>> Narcis Garcia
>>
>> __
>> I'm using this dedicated address because personal addresses aren't
>> masked enough at this mail public archive. Public archive
>administrator
>> should fix this against automated addresses collectors.
>> El 30/11/21 a les 12:55, Daniel ha escrit:
>> > Hola: he desinstalat un ADE d'una versió antiga, instal·lat amb
>Wine, i
>> > estic intentant instalar de nou el ADE4.5 també amb wine i em diu
>en una
>> > finestra de wine:/Adobe Digital Editions 4.5.11 Setup / Adobe
>Digital
>> > Editions is already running. Please close Adobe Dibital Editions
>4.5 and
>> > try again./ Tanco aquesta finestra i en surt una altra que penjo
>com a
>> > captura de pantalla: marco Show Details i surt una llista que
>> > reprodueixo a continuació:
>> >
>> > Unhandled exception: page fault on read access to 0x in
>32-bit
>> code (0x10001559).
>> > Register dump:
>> >   CS:0023 SS:002b DS:002b ES:002b FS:006b GS:0063
>> >   EIP:10001559 ESP:0033fcf8 EBP:004072f0 EFLAGS:00210206(  R- --  I
>  -
>> -P- )
>> >   EAX: EBX: ECX:00590020 EDX:
>> >   ESI:00440c90 EDI:00422ec0
>> > Stack dump:
>> > 0x0033fcf8:  004037d7 0001  00403b05
>> > 0x0033fd08:  0001 7b462690 0042a400 00429000
>> > 0x0033fd18:   0001 c3e359db 00429000
>> > 0x0033fd28:  0040351d 004035b3 0033fed8 
>> > 0x0033fd38:  7b63ee08 7b63ee08  0020
>> > 0x0033fd48:   00429020  
>> > Backtrace:
>> > =>0 0x10001559 EntryPoint+0x() in system (0x004072f0)
>> > 0x10001559 EntryPoint+0x in system: testl
>%eax,0x0(%eax)
>> > Modules:
>> > ModuleAddress Debug info  Name (32
>modules)
>> > PE  40-  43a000   Deferredade_4,5_installer
>> > PE1000-10006000   Export  system
>> > PE7ac1-7ac23000   Deferredriched20
>> > PE7b42-7b5d   Deferredkernel32
>> > PE7bc1-7bc14000   Deferredntdll
>> > PE7df2-7df23000   Deferredkerberos
>> > PE7df6-7df64000   Deferredws2_32
>> > PE7dfa-7dfa4000   Deferrediphlpapi
>> > PE7dfc-7dfc3000   Deferrednetapi32
>> > PE7dff-7dff3000   Deferredsecur32
>> > PE7e07-7e074000   Deferredshfolder
>> > PE7e08-7e096000   Deferredoleacc
>> > PE7e0e-7e0e4000   Deferreddwmapi
>> > PE7e11-7e118000   Deferredoleaut32
>> > PE7e22-7e224000   Deferredpropsys
>> > PE7e25-7e253000   Deferredapphelp
>> > PE7e27-7e27f000   Deferredsetupapi
>> > PE7e2d-7e2d3000   Deferreduserenv
>> > PE7e51-7e514000   Deferreduxtheme
>> > PE7e55-7e554000   Deferredwinex11
>> > PE7eaa-7eaa4000   Deferredimm32
>> > PE7ead-7ead3000   Deferredusp10
>> > PE7eb1-7eb8d000   Deferredcomctl32
>> > PE7ec8-7ec84000   Deferredrpcrt4
>> > PE7ed1-7ed38000   Deferredole32
>> > PE7ee7-7ee78000   Deferredshlwapi
>> > PE7eee-7f7b1000   Deferredshell32
>> > PE7f8a-7f8a4000   Deferredadvapi32
>> > PE7f92-7f927000   Deferredgdi32
>> > PE7fa5-7fb37000   Deferreduser32
>> > PE7ffb-7ffb3000   Deferredshcore
>> > PE7ffd-7ffd4000   Deferredversion
>> > Threads:
>> > process  tid  prio (all id:s are in hex)
>> > 0008 (D) C:\windows\ADE_4,5_Installer.exe
>> >   00390
>> >   00090 <==
>> > 000e services.exe
>> >   002f0
>> >   002a0
>> >   00240
>> >   00100
>> >   000f0
>> > 0022 

still fixing stuff the upgrade broke...

[Roy J. Tellason, Sr.]

So in my Xfce applications menu I have a top-level entry "Ham radio",  and 
there was exactly _one_ program to invoke under that,  called "chirp".  (I use 
this to program radios.)  I don't run this too often,  but having recently 
acquired a new radio I went to fire it up,  and got a "file not found" error.  
WTF?  I've no idea where this menu stores its data,  but there was no entry 
there when I went into the menu option to edit thing.  It just showed *no* 
entry in there at all.  Why an upgrade would screw with this I have no idea...

So I downloaded the current version of the program.  This gets incremental 
upgrades all the time,  and the latest one is chirp20220103,  which I 
downloaded.  When I went to invoke it directly,  there was an error about some 
missing python bit.  Going into synaptic,  I didn't see chirp listed at all,  
though it did show up when I did a search,  and installing that package got me 
a version from 2018!  (Why the repository can't be more up to date than that I 
don't know.)  This also provided the missing python bit.  So I edited the 
application menu entry to point to the new version,  and it now works.

I've been nudged more than once to continue with my upgrades to bring things up 
to the current stable version,  but am still not sure I want to go there in one 
swell foop.  Too many changes,  and things that aren't right.

I'm stilll trying to figure out what's invoking a screensaver in my virtualbox 
slackware install,  which I don't want but can't quite figout out how to turn 
off...



-- 
Member of the toughest, meanest, deadliest, most unrelenting -- and
ablest -- form of life in this section of space,  a critter that can
be killed but can't be tamed.  --Robert A. Heinlein, "The Puppet Masters"
-
Information is more dangerous than cannon to a society ruled by lies. --James 
M Dakin

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Cecil Westerhof]

Diederik de Haas  writes:

> On Wednesday, 5 January 2022 22:43:01 CET Cecil Westerhof wrote:
>> > In /var/log/dpkg.log[.*] zou je dat moeten kunnen terugvinden.
>> 
>> Dan lijkt het erop dat mijn laatste update/upgrade op 20 december was.
>> Meer dan twee weken geleden. Dat lijkt me niet helemaal koosjer.
>
> En de laatste point release van Bullseye was van 18 december en het is geen 
> toeval dat die data dicht bij elkaar liggen.
> Als je niks aan je instellingen aanpast, krijg je waarschijnlijk pas bij de 
> volgende point release weer updates ;-)

Er was een bestand /etc/apt/apt.conf dat bevatte:
APT::Default-Release "bullseye";

Dat verwijderd en toen konden 13 pakketten worden ge-upgrade waaronder
firefox-esr. Dat gedaan en nu werkt de scrollbar weer bij messages in
LinkedIn.

-- 
Cecil Westerhof
Senior Software Engineer
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/cecilwesterhof

Re: Thunderbird not allowing local accounts

[rhkramer]

On Wednesday, January 05, 2022 11:58:09 AM Celejar wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 09:44:24 -0500
> "Paul M. Foster"  wrote:
> > Can anyone recommend another MUA which uses mbox format and is
> > relatively easy to configure?
> 
> Sylpheed?

kmail (for kde prior to 4.8.4, and maybe a few later versions, but by 4.14.2., 
it no longer supported mbox)

e.g., kmail, kmail 1.13.7 under kde 4.8.4 (on Debian Wheezy (yeah, I know)

or the kmail in TDE (the Trinity Desktop Environment) 

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Cecil Westerhof]

Diederik de Haas  writes:

> On Wednesday, 5 January 2022 22:56:10 CET Cecil Westerhof wrote:
>> > Kan je de output van 'apt-cache policy firefox-esr' delen?
>> > Eventueel ook van 'apt-cache policy'.
>> > 
>> > Het kan zijn dat je dmv een preference of apt-config file een bepaalde
>> > release als 'preferred' hebt ingesteld en dat daarom updates van
>> > -security niet worden geïnstalleerd.
>> 
>> firefox-esr:
>>   Installed: 78.15.0esr-1~deb11u1
>>   Candidate: 78.15.0esr-1~deb11u1
>>   Version table:
>>  91.4.1esr-1~deb11u1 500
>> 500 https://security.debian.org/debian-security
>> bullseye-security/main amd64 Packages *** 78.15.0esr-1~deb11u1 990
>> 990 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main amd64 Packages
>> 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
>
> Dit laat je probleem zien; bullseye heeft priority 990 terwijl bullseye-
> security prio 500 heeft. De hoogste prio wint.
> Dit zie je meestal als je een "Default-Release" hebt ingesteld
> $ cat /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/40defaultrelease 
> #APT::Default-Release "testing";
>
> Ik heb de file wel, maar de setting is disabled.
>
> $ apt-config dump | grep Default
> Zal bij jouw aangeven dat bullseye (maar dus niet bullseye-security) de 
> default release is.
>
> Kennelijk bestaat er een undocumented feature dat je een regular expression 
> kan gebruiken bij Default-Release, zodat die bv 'bullseye*' is, maar in de 
> (zeer) korte tijd dat ik ernaar gekeken heb, kreeg ik dat niet werkend.
>
> Maar ik ben 99% zeker dat dit je probleem is.

Er was een bestand /etc/apt/apt.conf dat bevatte:
APT::Default-Release "bullseye";

Toen ik dat verwijderde leverde 'apt update' op dat er dertien
packages moesten worden ge-upgrade, waaronder firefox-esr.

Misschien binnenkort eens goed in apt duiken.

-- 
Cecil Westerhof
Senior Software Engineer
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/cecilwesterhof

Re: Problems with videos playback for my user

[Lucio Crusca]

On 06/01/22 00:22, Jeremy Ardley wrote:

Any or all of of these:

- Check CPU usage.
- Uninstall Steam
- reboot


Thanks, nice try, but, besides I've cleared all three steps just in case (CPU 
always below 5% while playing videos), none of those can explain why video 
playback still works correctly for all the users except mine.

Re: Problems with videos playback for my user

[Jeremy Ardley]

On 6/1/22 6:58 am, Lucio Crusca wrote:
I'm on Debian sid, using pipewire (just in case that makes any 
difference). Since a few hours my user is not able to playback videos 
anymore.


All browsers and mplayer in general behave like this: they do not play 
just the "video" part, but they normally play any sound tracks the 
videos come with. They play just a few starting frames of the video 
and then the video freezes, while sound keeps playing correctly as if 
video was playing too.


vlc plays the video correctly, but it plays stuttering sound like 
there were a lot of xruns.


xine is a mix of the others, as it plays both video and sound, but 
they both stutter a lot.


Everything was working ok until a few hours ago. Then I installed 
Steam, but I'm not sure that's the cause of the problem and I suspect 
it is not, because Steam was installed system-wide and other users on 
the same system do not have any video playback problem. Also Steam 
installation did not update pipewire, which is the same 0.3.42 version 
that was working like a charm a few hours ago and it is still working 
like a charm for other users on the same system.


I use Xfce, while other users use Gnome, but I've already tried 
logging out and logging back in with Gnome with my user and the 
problem is the same.


All this happens regardless of the video being online or downloaded 
offline.


Any clues?


Any or all of of these:

- Check CPU usage.
- Uninstall Steam
- reboot

--
Jeremy





OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Problems with videos playback for my user

[Lucio Crusca]

I'm on Debian sid, using pipewire (just in case that makes any difference). 
Since a few hours my user is not able to playback videos anymore.

All browsers and mplayer in general behave like this: they do not play just the 
"video" part, but they normally play any sound tracks the videos come with. 
They play just a few starting frames of the video and then the video freezes, while sound 
keeps playing correctly as if video was playing too.

vlc plays the video correctly, but it plays stuttering sound like there were a 
lot of xruns.

xine is a mix of the others, as it plays both video and sound, but they both 
stutter a lot.

Everything was working ok until a few hours ago. Then I installed Steam, but 
I'm not sure that's the cause of the problem and I suspect it is not, because 
Steam was installed system-wide and other users on the same system do not have 
any video playback problem. Also Steam installation did not update pipewire, 
which is the same 0.3.42 version that was working like a charm a few hours ago 
and it is still working like a charm for other users on the same system.

I use Xfce, while other users use Gnome, but I've already tried logging out and 
logging back in with Gnome with my user and the problem is the same.

All this happens regardless of the video being online or downloaded offline.

Any clues?

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Diederik de Haas]

On Wednesday, 5 January 2022 22:43:01 CET Cecil Westerhof wrote:
> > In /var/log/dpkg.log[.*] zou je dat moeten kunnen terugvinden.
> 
> Dan lijkt het erop dat mijn laatste update/upgrade op 20 december was.
> Meer dan twee weken geleden. Dat lijkt me niet helemaal koosjer.

En de laatste point release van Bullseye was van 18 december en het is geen 
toeval dat die data dicht bij elkaar liggen.
Als je niks aan je instellingen aanpast, krijg je waarschijnlijk pas bij de 
volgende point release weer updates ;-)

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Diederik de Haas]

On Wednesday, 5 January 2022 23:30:10 CET Paul van der Vlis wrote:
> Er staat inderdaad vast iets raars in /etc/apt/ bij Cecil.
> 
> -
> root@laptopp:~# apt-cache policy firefox-esr
> firefox-esr:
>Geïnstalleerd: 91.4.1esr-1~deb11u1
>Kandidaat: 91.4.1esr-1~deb11u1
>Versietabel:
>   *** 91.4.1esr-1~deb11u1 500
>  500 https://security.debian.org/debian-security
> bullseye-security/main amd64 Packages
>  100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
>   78.15.0esr-1~deb11u1 500
>  500 https://debian.snt.utwente.nl/debian bullseye/main amd64
> Packages

Bij jouw hebben bullseye-security en bullseye dezelfde prio en dan wint het 
pakket het met het hoogste versie nummer, dus jij hebt wel 91.4.x

> Die Default commando's geven bij mij niets zinvols:
> --
> root@laptopp:~# cat /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/40defaultrelease
> cat: /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/40defaultrelease: Bestand of map bestaat niet

De 40defaultrelease is een bestand dat ik zelf ooit heb aangemaakt (en is een 
redelijk willekeurige naam). Doordat jij dat bestand niet hebt, verschijnt 
Default-Release ook niet in jouw output. Bij mij ook niet, omdat ik die 
setting had disabled. Maar ik ben er (dus) behoorlijk zeker van dat die bij 
Cecil er wel tussen staat.

HTH

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Paul van der Vlis]

Op 05-01-2022 om 23:17 schreef Diederik de Haas:

On Wednesday, 5 January 2022 22:56:10 CET Cecil Westerhof wrote:

Kan je de output van 'apt-cache policy firefox-esr' delen?
Eventueel ook van 'apt-cache policy'.

Het kan zijn dat je dmv een preference of apt-config file een bepaalde
release als 'preferred' hebt ingesteld en dat daarom updates van
-security niet worden geïnstalleerd.


firefox-esr:
   Installed: 78.15.0esr-1~deb11u1
   Candidate: 78.15.0esr-1~deb11u1
   Version table:
  91.4.1esr-1~deb11u1 500
 500 https://security.debian.org/debian-security
bullseye-security/main amd64 Packages *** 78.15.0esr-1~deb11u1 990
 990 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main amd64 Packages
 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status


Dit laat je probleem zien; bullseye heeft priority 990 terwijl bullseye-
security prio 500 heeft. De hoogste prio wint.
Dit zie je meestal als je een "Default-Release" hebt ingesteld
$ cat /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/40defaultrelease
#APT::Default-Release "testing";

Ik heb de file wel, maar de setting is disabled.

$ apt-config dump | grep Default
Zal bij jouw aangeven dat bullseye (maar dus niet bullseye-security) de
default release is.

Kennelijk bestaat er een undocumented feature dat je een regular expression
kan gebruiken bij Default-Release, zodat die bv 'bullseye*' is, maar in de
(zeer) korte tijd dat ik ernaar gekeken heb, kreeg ik dat niet werkend.

Maar ik ben 99% zeker dat dit je probleem is.


Er staat inderdaad vast iets raars in /etc/apt/ bij Cecil.

-
root@laptopp:~# apt-cache policy firefox-esr
firefox-esr:
  Geïnstalleerd: 91.4.1esr-1~deb11u1
  Kandidaat: 91.4.1esr-1~deb11u1
  Versietabel:
 *** 91.4.1esr-1~deb11u1 500
500 https://security.debian.org/debian-security 
bullseye-security/main amd64 Packages

100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
 78.15.0esr-1~deb11u1 500
500 https://debian.snt.utwente.nl/debian bullseye/main amd64 
Packages

root@laptopp:~#
-

Die Default commando's geven bij mij niets zinvols:
--
root@laptopp:~# apt-config dump | grep Default
Acquire::IndexTargets::deb::DEP-11-icons-small::DefaultEnabled "true";
Acquire::IndexTargets::deb::DEP-11-icons::DefaultEnabled "true";
Acquire::IndexTargets::deb::DEP-11-icons-hidpi::DefaultEnabled "false";
Acquire::IndexTargets::deb::DEP-11-icons-large::DefaultEnabled "false";
Acquire::IndexTargets::deb::DEP-11-icons-large-hidpi::DefaultEnabled 
"false";

root@laptopp:~# cat /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/40defaultrelease
cat: /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/40defaultrelease: Bestand of map bestaat niet
root@laptopp:~#
--

Groet,
Paul

--
Paul van der Vlis Linux systeembeheer Groningen
https://vandervlis.nl/

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Diederik de Haas]

On Wednesday, 5 January 2022 22:56:10 CET Cecil Westerhof wrote:
> > Kan je de output van 'apt-cache policy firefox-esr' delen?
> > Eventueel ook van 'apt-cache policy'.
> > 
> > Het kan zijn dat je dmv een preference of apt-config file een bepaalde
> > release als 'preferred' hebt ingesteld en dat daarom updates van
> > -security niet worden geïnstalleerd.
> 
> firefox-esr:
>   Installed: 78.15.0esr-1~deb11u1
>   Candidate: 78.15.0esr-1~deb11u1
>   Version table:
>  91.4.1esr-1~deb11u1 500
> 500 https://security.debian.org/debian-security
> bullseye-security/main amd64 Packages *** 78.15.0esr-1~deb11u1 990
> 990 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main amd64 Packages
> 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status

Dit laat je probleem zien; bullseye heeft priority 990 terwijl bullseye-
security prio 500 heeft. De hoogste prio wint.
Dit zie je meestal als je een "Default-Release" hebt ingesteld
$ cat /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/40defaultrelease 
#APT::Default-Release "testing";

Ik heb de file wel, maar de setting is disabled.

$ apt-config dump | grep Default
Zal bij jouw aangeven dat bullseye (maar dus niet bullseye-security) de 
default release is.

Kennelijk bestaat er een undocumented feature dat je een regular expression 
kan gebruiken bij Default-Release, zodat die bv 'bullseye*' is, maar in de 
(zeer) korte tijd dat ik ernaar gekeken heb, kreeg ik dat niet werkend.

Maar ik ben 99% zeker dat dit je probleem is.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Paul van der Vlis]

Op 05-01-2022 om 23:01 schreef Cecil Westerhof:

Paul van der Vlis  writes:


Wellicht hier nog:
mkdir /var/lib/apt/lists


Die bestond al.


Dan had je daarvoor niet dit gedaan ;-)
mv /var/lib/apt/lists /var/lib/apt/lists-backup

Groet,
Paul

--
Paul van der Vlis Linux systeembeheer Groningen
https://vandervlis.nl/

Re: Adobe Digital Editions - No consegueixo reinstalar-lo

[Julio Amorós]

Hola,
ja sé que faig tard però he fet un guió per instal·lar ADE a Debian 11.
https://gitlab.com/pingui/deb-at-inf/-/blob/master/Debian11/HowTo/ADE.md

De fet, vaig continuar amb calibre i els plugins per treure el DRM d'un
llibre electrònic que vaig comprar, però no sé si estaria bé penjar el guió
també :)
Vagi bé,
Julio

Missatge de Narcis Garcia  del dia dt., 30 de nov.
2021 a les 13:21:

> Jo normalment faig servir PlayOnLinux per aquesta mena d'instal·lacions,
> ja que POL utilitza Wine dins de «contenidors»: Et crea un «Wine prefix»
> que implica fer un subdirectori com a «arrel de Windows» dedicat en
> exclusiva a l'aplicació que prepares.
> Això va molt bé per a separar aplicacions, versions, fer còpia de
> seguretat, i també fer net quan en descartes una.
>
> El projecte està molt poc mantingut, però funciona:
> www.playonlinux.com
>
>
> Narcis Garcia
>
> __
> I'm using this dedicated address because personal addresses aren't
> masked enough at this mail public archive. Public archive administrator
> should fix this against automated addresses collectors.
> El 30/11/21 a les 12:55, Daniel ha escrit:
> > Hola: he desinstalat un ADE d'una versió antiga, instal·lat amb Wine, i
> > estic intentant instalar de nou el ADE4.5 també amb wine i em diu en una
> > finestra de wine:/Adobe Digital Editions 4.5.11 Setup / Adobe Digital
> > Editions is already running. Please close Adobe Dibital Editions 4.5 and
> > try again./ Tanco aquesta finestra i en surt una altra que penjo com a
> > captura de pantalla: marco Show Details i surt una llista que
> > reprodueixo a continuació:
> >
> > Unhandled exception: page fault on read access to 0x in 32-bit
> code (0x10001559).
> > Register dump:
> >   CS:0023 SS:002b DS:002b ES:002b FS:006b GS:0063
> >   EIP:10001559 ESP:0033fcf8 EBP:004072f0 EFLAGS:00210206(  R- --  I   -
> -P- )
> >   EAX: EBX: ECX:00590020 EDX:
> >   ESI:00440c90 EDI:00422ec0
> > Stack dump:
> > 0x0033fcf8:  004037d7 0001  00403b05
> > 0x0033fd08:  0001 7b462690 0042a400 00429000
> > 0x0033fd18:   0001 c3e359db 00429000
> > 0x0033fd28:  0040351d 004035b3 0033fed8 
> > 0x0033fd38:  7b63ee08 7b63ee08  0020
> > 0x0033fd48:   00429020  
> > Backtrace:
> > =>0 0x10001559 EntryPoint+0x() in system (0x004072f0)
> > 0x10001559 EntryPoint+0x in system: testl %eax,0x0(%eax)
> > Modules:
> > ModuleAddress Debug info  Name (32 modules)
> > PE  40-  43a000   Deferredade_4,5_installer
> > PE1000-10006000   Export  system
> > PE7ac1-7ac23000   Deferredriched20
> > PE7b42-7b5d   Deferredkernel32
> > PE7bc1-7bc14000   Deferredntdll
> > PE7df2-7df23000   Deferredkerberos
> > PE7df6-7df64000   Deferredws2_32
> > PE7dfa-7dfa4000   Deferrediphlpapi
> > PE7dfc-7dfc3000   Deferrednetapi32
> > PE7dff-7dff3000   Deferredsecur32
> > PE7e07-7e074000   Deferredshfolder
> > PE7e08-7e096000   Deferredoleacc
> > PE7e0e-7e0e4000   Deferreddwmapi
> > PE7e11-7e118000   Deferredoleaut32
> > PE7e22-7e224000   Deferredpropsys
> > PE7e25-7e253000   Deferredapphelp
> > PE7e27-7e27f000   Deferredsetupapi
> > PE7e2d-7e2d3000   Deferreduserenv
> > PE7e51-7e514000   Deferreduxtheme
> > PE7e55-7e554000   Deferredwinex11
> > PE7eaa-7eaa4000   Deferredimm32
> > PE7ead-7ead3000   Deferredusp10
> > PE7eb1-7eb8d000   Deferredcomctl32
> > PE7ec8-7ec84000   Deferredrpcrt4
> > PE7ed1-7ed38000   Deferredole32
> > PE7ee7-7ee78000   Deferredshlwapi
> > PE7eee-7f7b1000   Deferredshell32
> > PE7f8a-7f8a4000   Deferredadvapi32
> > PE7f92-7f927000   Deferredgdi32
> > PE7fa5-7fb37000   Deferreduser32
> > PE7ffb-7ffb3000   Deferredshcore
> > PE7ffd-7ffd4000   Deferredversion
> > Threads:
> > process  tid  prio (all id:s are in hex)
> > 0008 (D) C:\windows\ADE_4,5_Installer.exe
> >   00390
> >   00090 <==
> > 000e services.exe
> >   002f0
> >   002a0
> >   00240
> >   00100
> >   000f0
> > 0022 winedevice.exe
> >   00270
> >
> > Sembla que ha quedat algun rastre de la versió antiga de ADE, que
> > impideix que funcioni la nova, però he estat incapaç de trobar-ho.
> >
> > Si algú pot donar-me una orientació, us estaré molt agraït.
> >
> > --
> > Daniel Elias
> 

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Cecil Westerhof]

Paul van der Vlis  writes:

> Misschien heb je Firefox niet (goed) herstart, en draai je nog de oude
> versie?
>
> Dit geeft een versienummer van wat op disk staat:
> dpkg -l | grep firefox-esr

ii  firefox-esr78.15.0esr-1~deb11u1 amd64Mozilla Firefox web 
browser - Extended Support Rele>

En 'apt install firefox-esr' geeft:
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree... Done
Reading state information... Done
firefox-esr is already the newest version (78.15.0esr-1~deb11u1).
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded

-- 
Cecil Westerhof
Senior Software Engineer
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/cecilwesterhof

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Cecil Westerhof]

Geert Stappers  writes:

> Of een  eenvoudige
>
>   sudo apt install firefox-esr

# apt install firefox-esr
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree... Done
Reading state information... Done
firefox-esr is already the newest version (78.15.0esr-1~deb11u1).
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.

-- 
Cecil Westerhof
Senior Software Engineer
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/cecilwesterhof

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Cecil Westerhof]

Paul van der Vlis  writes:

> Uiteraard heb je hier ook nog iets nodig als:
> apt dist-upgrade

Ik moet eerst op het punt komen dat er iets te upgraden is, maar het
moet dist-upgrade zijn en niet upgrade?

-- 
Cecil Westerhof
Senior Software Engineer
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/cecilwesterhof

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Cecil Westerhof]

Paul van der Vlis  writes:

> Wellicht hier nog:
> mkdir /var/lib/apt/lists

Die bestond al.

-- 
Cecil Westerhof
Senior Software Engineer
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/cecilwesterhof

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Cecil Westerhof]

Paul van der Vlis  writes:

> Eerlijk gezegd weet ik het niet.
>
> Wat ik zou doen is dit, deze code is heel goed getest:
> ---
> now=$(date +"%d-%m-%y")
> cd /tmp
> wget https://vandervlis.nl/files/sources.list11
> mv /etc/apt/sources.list /etc/apt/sources.list-$now
> mv sources.list11 /etc/apt/sources.list
> apt-get -qq update
> ---

Dat ga ik nog proberen.


> Er zou verder wat mis kunnen zijn met je apt database, je zou dit kunnen
> proberen:
> ---
> mv /var/lib/apt/lists /var/lib/apt/lists-backup
> apt update
> apt dist-upgrade
> ---

Oook dat geeft:
All packages are up to date.

-- 
Cecil Westerhof
Senior Software Engineer
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/cecilwesterhof

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Cecil Westerhof]

Diederik de Haas  writes:

> On Wednesday, 5 January 2022 20:18:42 CET Diederik de Haas wrote:
>> > Maar ik blijf het vreemd vinden dat er al een poosje geen updates zijn
>> > gewest.
>> 
>> Versie 91.4.1esr-1~deb11u1 van firefox-esr zou beschikbaar moeten zijn
>> volgens
>> https://deb.debian.org/debian-security/dists/bullseye-security/main/binary-> 
>> amd64/Packages.xz
>
> Kan je de output van 'apt-cache policy firefox-esr' delen?
> Eventueel ook van 'apt-cache policy'.
>
> Het kan zijn dat je dmv een preference of apt-config file een bepaalde 
> release 
> als 'preferred' hebt ingesteld en dat daarom updates van -security niet 
> worden 
> geïnstalleerd.

firefox-esr:
  Installed: 78.15.0esr-1~deb11u1
  Candidate: 78.15.0esr-1~deb11u1
  Version table:
 91.4.1esr-1~deb11u1 500
500 https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security/main 
amd64 Packages
 *** 78.15.0esr-1~deb11u1 990
990 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main amd64 Packages
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status

In die status file zie ik:
Package: firefox-esr
Status: install ok installed
Priority: optional
Section: web
Installed-Size: 200097
Maintainer: Maintainers of Mozilla-related packages 

Architecture: amd64
Version: 78.15.0esr-1~deb11u1
Provides: gnome-www-browser, www-browser
Depends: libatk1.0-0 (>= 1.12.4), libc6 (>= 2.29), libcairo-gobject2 (>= 
1.10.0), libcairo2 (>= 1.10.0), libdbus-1-3 (>= 1.9.14), libdbus-glib-1-2 (>= 
0.78), libevent-2.1-7 (>= 2.1.8-stable), libffi7 (>= 3.3~20180313), 
libfontconfig1 (>= 2.12.6), libfreetype6 (>= 2.10.1), libgcc-s1 (>= 4.0), 
libgdk-pixbuf-2.0-0 (>= 2.22.0), libglib2.0-0 (>= 2.31.8), libgtk-3-0 (>= 
3.0.0), libnspr4 (>= 2:4.25~), libnss3 (>= 2:3.53.1~), libpango-1.0-0 (>= 
1.14.0), libstdc++6 (>= 9), libvpx6 (>= 1.8.0), libx11-6, libx11-xcb1 (>= 
2:1.7.2), libxcb-shm0, libxcb1, libxcomposite1 (>= 1:0.4.5), libxdamage1 (>= 
1:1.1), libxext6, libxfixes3, libxrender1, zlib1g (>= 1:1.2.11.dfsg), 
fontconfig, procps, debianutils (>= 1.16)
Recommends: libavcodec58 | libavcodec-extra58 | libavcodec57 | 
libavcodec-extra57 | libavcodec56 | libavcodec-extra56 | libavcodec55 | 
libavcodec-extra55 | libavcodec54 | libavcodec-extra54 | libavcodec53 | 
libavcodec-extra53
Suggests: fonts-stix | otf-stix, fonts-lmodern, libgssapi-krb5-2 | 
libkrb53, libcanberra0, libgtk2.0-0, pulseaudio
Breaks: xul-ext-torbutton
Conffiles:
 /etc/firefox-esr/firefox-esr.js cebd145f0dd82696213e50218ff1a1bf
Description: Mozilla Firefox web browser - Extended Support Release (ESR)
 Firefox ESR is a powerful, extensible web browser with support for modern
 web application technologies.


Wat me ook opvalt is dat in die directory een bestand lock staat met
datum 20 december. En dat is de laatste keer dat een update is gedaan.
Kan ik die zonder problemen verwijderen?

En als ik nog wat verder kijk zie ik dat ik in /var nog maar 783M vrij
heb. Kan dat het/een probleem zijn? Zo ja, zou apt dan geen melding
moeten geven?

-- 
Cecil Westerhof
Senior Software Engineer
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/cecilwesterhof

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Cecil Westerhof]

Diederik de Haas  writes:

>> Is er een manier om te zien wanneer ik mijn laatste update/upgrade
>> heeft plaatsgevonden.
>
> In /var/log/dpkg.log[.*] zou je dat moeten kunnen terugvinden.

Dan lijkt het erop dat mijn laatste update/upgrade op 20 december was.
Meer dan twee weken geleden. Dat lijkt me niet helemaal koosjer.

-- 
Cecil Westerhof
Senior Software Engineer
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/cecilwesterhof

Re: Thunderbird not allowing local accounts

[Celejar]

On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 12:33:36 -0800
cono...@rahul.net (John Conover) wrote:

> pa...@quillandmouse.com writes:
> > On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 11:58:09 -0500
> > Celejar  wrote:
> > 
> > > On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 09:44:24 -0500
> > > "Paul M. Foster"  wrote:
> > > 
> > > ...
> > > 
> > > > Thanks for the info. Mozilla Foundation is seriously annoying me
> > > > lately.
> > > > 
> > > > Can anyone recommend another MUA which uses mbox format and is 
> > > > relatively easy to configure?
> > > 
> > > Sylpheed?
> > > 
> > > Celejar
> > > 
> > 
> > It's starting to look that way. Actually, I'm looking at claws-mail.
> >
> 
> Yea, and claws-mail is not compatible with Gmail's oauth2, which is
> now required by Google, (as of this month,) and Thunderbird is

? I'm still downloading my Gmail email via POP3 with getmail, without
OAuth2. For a couple of years now, Google has been pushing OAuth2, but
has still allowed ordinary POP3 / IMAP access to email using "app
specific passwords." Has something changed recently?

https://support.google.com/mail/thread/23019816/how-can-i-continue-to-use-pop-based-email-after-oauth-is-required-next-year

> compatible, but no longer supports local mbox delivery for a LAN.

FWIW, BTW, getmail (which does support mbox delivery) does have support
for Gmail's OAuth2 (in case you want / need to use it) via its
getmail-gmail-xoauth-tokens script:

https://www.bytereef.org/howto/oauth2/getmail.html

You can also find detailed instructions in the file
"getmailrc-examples.gz", in Debian's getmail6 package.

Celejar

Re: [SOLVED] Re: Firefox: Warning: Potential Security Risk Ahead for the USPS.com

[Celejar]

On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 19:42:33 +0100
 wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 12:41:23PM -0500, Celejar wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > The configuration I'm talking about is as follows: the browser makes
> > ordinary, unencrypted DNS requests to the Pi-hole, over a trusted
> > network
> 
> If the browser decides to make the DNS requests over HTTPS (DoH [1],
> that's what we are talking about), the DNS server in your Pi-hole doesn't
> even get to see those requests.

So tell the browser not to use DoH! Am I really being so unclear? My
point is that it's a straightforward matter to get the DNS requests of
your applications - browsers, and all other applications as well -
checked against blocklists, and then sent over DoH if they aren't
blocked by the lists.

> > (your LAN, or a VPN). HTTPS isn't necessary here insofar as you
> > trust your own network to be secure. (And if you're really worried about
> > intruders [...]
> 
> No, no. I'm not worried about those things. I'm worried that the
> browsers do their own thing to do name lookup so they escape my control
> (be it via /etc/hosts, be it via an own DNS server, local or Pi-hole).

I'm not sure why you're worried about browsers doing their own things
despite your telling them not to, or where anyone mentioned such a
concern in this thread, but if you are worried about that sort of
thing, then I agree that it's pretty much game over. Even if you block
known DoH servers at the firewall, I suppose you can always worry about
browsers contacting some unknown DoH server. And why stop there? Maybe
the browser will do some nefarious phoning home, using some homegrown
protocol, encapsulated inside HTTPS so you'll never know about it! The
bottom line is that yes, if you don't trust your browser and you allow it to
contact arbitrary sites over HTTPS, then it's game over.

> > https://www.reddit.com/r/pihole/comments/ku0i8k/configuring_dnsoverhttps_on_pihole/
> 
> Again: I'm not that much concerned about my lookup's privacy. The
> Pi-hole having an option to do DoH lookups is fine. But do I trust my
> browser to not do direct DoH lookups all by itself, bypassing my Pi-hole
> (or whatever I've set up as a controlled DNS)? What about its next
> version?

Celejar

Re: Thunderbird not allowing local accounts

[John Conover]

pa...@quillandmouse.com writes:
> On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 11:58:09 -0500
> Celejar  wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 09:44:24 -0500
> > "Paul M. Foster"  wrote:
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> > > Thanks for the info. Mozilla Foundation is seriously annoying me
> > > lately.
> > > 
> > > Can anyone recommend another MUA which uses mbox format and is 
> > > relatively easy to configure?
> > 
> > Sylpheed?
> > 
> > Celejar
> > 
> 
> It's starting to look that way. Actually, I'm looking at claws-mail.
>

Yea, and claws-mail is not compatible with Gmail's oauth2, which is
now required by Google, (as of this month,) and Thunderbird is
compatible, but no longer supports local mbox delivery for a LAN.

Kind of a mess.

John

-- 

John Conover, cono...@rahul.net, http://www.johncon.com/

Re: Thunderbird not allowing local accounts

[Celejar]

On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 13:28:55 -0500
 wrote:

> On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 11:58:09 -0500
> Celejar  wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 09:44:24 -0500
> > "Paul M. Foster"  wrote:
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> > > Thanks for the info. Mozilla Foundation is seriously annoying me
> > > lately.
> > > 
> > > Can anyone recommend another MUA which uses mbox format and is 
> > > relatively easy to configure?
> > 
> > Sylpheed?
> > 
> > Celejar
> > 
> 
> It's starting to look that way. Actually, I'm looking at claws-mail.

Claws started out as a fork of Sylph, but eventually evolved into a
distinct application. Sylph is very good, if not the newest and
shiniest thing. Claws is probably very good, too, although I've never
used it.

Celejar

Open-iscsi Multipath

[Gokan Atmaca]

Hello

I'm using TGT (OpenIscsi-server) on Debian. I made disk assignments to
the web servers with iscsi and it works. Your Openiscsi server also
has 2x 10Gbps ethernet. I want to assign a multipath disk to the
database server over this ethernet. What do I need to do with tgt and
openiscsi (client) for this?

Thanks.


-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian - The universal operating system
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://www.debian.org
⠈⠳⣄

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Diederik de Haas]

On Wednesday, 5 January 2022 20:18:42 CET Diederik de Haas wrote:
> > Maar ik blijf het vreemd vinden dat er al een poosje geen updates zijn
> > gewest.
> 
> Versie 91.4.1esr-1~deb11u1 van firefox-esr zou beschikbaar moeten zijn
> volgens
> https://deb.debian.org/debian-security/dists/bullseye-security/main/binary-> 
> amd64/Packages.xz

Kan je de output van 'apt-cache policy firefox-esr' delen?
Eventueel ook van 'apt-cache policy'.

Het kan zijn dat je dmv een preference of apt-config file een bepaalde release 
als 'preferred' hebt ingesteld en dat daarom updates van -security niet worden 
geïnstalleerd.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Paul van der Vlis]

Op 05-01-2022 om 19:57 schreef Cecil Westerhof:

Paul van der Vlis  writes:


Ik mis hier iets als:
Hit:2 https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security
InRelease

In mijn /etc/apt/sources.list staat deze regel:
deb https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main
contrib non-free

Daarna "apt update; apt dist-upgrade"


Ik heb nu:
 deb http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ bullseye main contrib non-free
 deb-src http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ bullseye main contrib non-free

 deb http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main contrib 
non-free
 deb-src http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main contrib 
non-free

 deb https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main 
contrib non-free
 deb-src https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main 
contrib non-free

 deb http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports main contrib 
non-free
 deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports main contrib 
non-free


Maar blijkbaar is er nog steeds iets niet goed, want ik krijg:
 Hit:1 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports InRelease
 Hit:2 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye InRelease
 Hit:3 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates InRelease
 Hit:4 https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security 
InRelease
 Reading package lists... Done
 Building dependency tree... Done
 Reading state information... Done
 All packages are up to date.


Ik dacht: laat ik het aanpassen naar:
 deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye main contrib non-free
 deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye main contrib non-free

 deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main contrib 
non-free
 deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main contrib 
non-free

 deb https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main 
contrib non-free
 deb-src https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main 
contrib non-free

 deb http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports main contrib 
non-free
 deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports main contrib 
non-free

Maar ook dat maakt niet uit, want ik krijg:
 Get:1 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye InRelease [116 kB]
 Get:2 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates InRelease [39.4 kB]
 Hit:3 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports InRelease
 Hit:4 https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security 
InRelease
 Get:5 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib Sources [43.0 kB]
 Get:6 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free Sources [80.5 kB]
 Get:7 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main Sources [8,626 kB]
 Get:8 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main amd64 Packages [8,183 kB]
 Get:9 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main Translation-en [6,243 kB]
 Get:10 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main all Contents (deb) [30.9 
MB]
 Get:11 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main amd64 Contents (deb) 
[10.2 MB]
 Get:12 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib amd64 Packages [50.5 
kB]
 Get:13 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib Translation-en [46.9 
kB]
 Get:14 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib amd64 Contents (deb) 
[54.6 kB]
 Get:15 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib all Contents (deb) 
[57.3 kB]
 Get:16 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free amd64 Packages [93.8 
kB]
 Get:17 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free Translation-en [91.5 
kB]
 Get:18 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free amd64 Contents (deb) 
[75.1 kB]
 Get:19 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free all Contents (deb) 
[888 kB]
 Get:20 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main Sources [1,868 B]
 Get:21 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main amd64 Packages 
[2,592 B]
 Get:22 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main Translation-en 
[2,343 B]
 Get:23 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main amd64 Contents 
(deb) [960 B]
 Get:24 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main all Contents 
(deb) [16.8 kB]
 Fetched 65.8 MB in 27s (2,459 kB/s)
 Reading package lists... Done
 Building dependency tree... Done
 Reading state information... Done
 All packages are up to date.


Wat doe ik verkeerd?


Misschien heb je Firefox niet (goed) herstart, en draai je nog de oude 
versie?


Dit geeft een versienummer van wat op disk staat:
dpkg -l | grep firefox-esr

Groet,
Paul



--
Paul van der Vlis Linux systeembeheer Groningen
https://vandervlis.nl/

Re: Thunderbird not allowing local accounts

[Jeremy Nicoll]

On Wed, 5 Jan 2022, at 19:52, Dan Ritter wrote:
> Jeremy Nicoll wrote: 
>> On Wed, 5 Jan 2022, at 13:35, Paul M. Foster wrote:
>> > Folks:
>> >
>> > I just restarted my machine, and am using Thunderbird 91.4.1 (the 
>> > latest) 64 bit on Debian 11. I didn't reinstall Thunderbird or upgrade 
>> > it...
>> 
>> I've never used TB so these questions might be crazy ...
>> 
>> Is TB able to import a set of mails stored in a folder somewhere 
>> else on a machine?
>
> That's the capability that appears to have gone away.


Well, I said I'd not used TB.  But on another client I used to use (until its
author stopped maintaining it) these were separate facilities.  One could
define a mail account from which mails would be fetched, but they'd 
just be read from a folder.  I did use that, when migrating from a client
on a separate OS; that OS separated mail fetch from mail debatch so 
while still using that client on its own OS I spun off duplicate sets of 
incoming mails and had the new client debatch from those folders.
Only once I was certain I had the new client working satisfactorily did
I update it to fetch direct from mail servers and stop using the local 
folder source.

Separately at any time one could manually do an import of mails from
some place.  Clearly the latter facility had to exist so that people could
move mail from one mail client to another.

In this situation I'd wonder if for example one could start TB from the 
commandline telling it to import from a folder, though that might not
work if TB is already running.

I'd also consider using some screen automation utility to automate 
the otherwise manual process of initiating an import via TB's menus.


-- 
Jeremy Nicoll - my opinions are my own.

Re: issue with smart

[Henning Follmann]

On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 08:20:08PM +0100, Hans wrote:
> Hi folks,
> 
> I have a little problerm I am hasseling with, maybe you can help.
> 
> On my 32-bit debian/stable (EEEPC) is popping a window up, that is telling 
> me, 
> that I need root rights, because it can not write the smart data into the 
> disk 
> (or wherever).
> 
> Does someone know this issue? I checked and the only "smart" similar demon is 
> smartd, and this one running with root-rights.
> 
> It also does not help, when I enter the correct root password, the window is 
> popping up again and again.
> 
> There is another hint: This issue only appear, when running the window 
> manager 
> LXQT, but maybe my other window manager PLASMA is suppressing this issue.
> 
> I also could not discover, why or which process is starting a GUI-window, so 
> this is completely strange for me.
> 
> Don't know, if this is a bug. Did someone else see this behaviour somewhen in 
> the past? This isssue is not new on my system, it does it for a real long 
> while (about half a year or so).
> 
> Thanks for any hints.
>

As always:
No log => it didn't happen.

My best guess is AppArmor profile is wrong. But without any
log, who knows, might be a green ogre flipping you off.

-H


-- 
Henning Follmann   | hfollm...@itcfollmann.com

Re: Thunderbird not allowing local accounts

[Dan Ritter]

Jeremy Nicoll wrote: 
> On Wed, 5 Jan 2022, at 13:35, Paul M. Foster wrote:
> > Folks:
> >
> > I just restarted my machine, and am using Thunderbird 91.4.1 (the 
> > latest) 64 bit on Debian 11. I didn't reinstall Thunderbird or upgrade 
> > it...
> 
> I've never used TB so these questions might be crazy ...
> 
> Is TB able to import a set of mails stored in a folder somewhere 
> else on a machine?

That's the capability that appears to have gone away.

> Does TB have filter capabilities that affect what happens with 
> mails as they're imported, perhaps separately from mails
> that are fetched from somewhere?

Yes.

> If those work, would one need a separate mechanism to get 
> the mails currently accumulating in "mail spool" or wherever
> into (exported?) a folder from which the import could pick 
> them up?

As previously mentioned, the mechanism for that is now "set up
dovecot or another IMAP server".

-dsr-

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Geert Stappers]

On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 08:58:24PM +0100, Paul van der Vlis wrote:
> 
> 
> Op 05-01-2022 om 20:49 schreef Paul van der Vlis:
> > Op 05-01-2022 om 19:57 schreef Cecil Westerhof:
> > > Paul van der Vlis  writes:
> > > 
> > > > Ik mis hier iets als:
> > > > Hit:2 https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security
> > > > InRelease
> > > > 
> > > > In mijn /etc/apt/sources.list staat deze regel:
> > > > deb https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main
> > > > contrib non-free
> > > > 
> > > > Daarna "apt update; apt dist-upgrade"
> > > 
> > > Ik heb nu:
> > >  deb http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ bullseye main contrib 
> > > non-free
> > >  deb-src http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ bullseye main contrib 
> > > non-free
> > > 
> > >  deb http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main 
> > > contrib non-free
> > >  deb-src http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main 
> > > contrib non-free
> > > 
> > >  deb https://security.debian.org/debian-security 
> > > bullseye-security main contrib non-free
> > >  deb-src https://security.debian.org/debian-security 
> > > bullseye-security main contrib non-free
> > > 
> > >  deb http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports main contrib 
> > > non-free
> > >  deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports main contrib 
> > > non-free
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Maar blijkbaar is er nog steeds iets niet goed, want ik krijg:
> > >  Hit:1 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports InRelease
> > >  Hit:2 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye InRelease
> > >  Hit:3 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates InRelease
> > >  Hit:4 https://security.debian.org/debian-security
> > > bullseye-security InRelease
> > >  Reading package lists... Done
> > >  Building dependency tree... Done
> > >  Reading state information... Done
> > >  All packages are up to date.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Ik dacht: laat ik het aanpassen naar:
> > >  deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye main contrib non-free
> > >  deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye main contrib non-free
> > > 
> > >  deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main contrib 
> > > non-free
> > >  deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main contrib 
> > > non-free
> > > 
> > >  deb https://security.debian.org/debian-security 
> > > bullseye-security main contrib non-free
> > >  deb-src https://security.debian.org/debian-security 
> > > bullseye-security main contrib non-free
> > > 
> > >  deb http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports main contrib 
> > > non-free
> > >  deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports main contrib 
> > > non-free
> > > 
> > > Maar ook dat maakt niet uit, want ik krijg:
> > >  Get:1 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye InRelease [116 kB]
> > >  Get:2 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates InRelease [39.4 
> > > kB]
> > >  Hit:3 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports InRelease
> > >  Hit:4 https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security 
> > > InRelease
> > >  Get:5 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib Sources [43.0 kB]
> > >  Get:6 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free Sources [80.5 
> > > kB]
> > >  Get:7 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main Sources [8,626 kB]
> > >  Get:8 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main amd64 Packages 
> > > [8,183 kB]
> > >  Get:9 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main Translation-en 
> > > [6,243 kB]
> > >  Get:10 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main all Contents (deb) 
> > > [30.9 MB]
> > >  Get:11 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main amd64 Contents 
> > > (deb) [10.2 MB]
> > >  Get:12 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib amd64 Packages 
> > > [50.5 kB]
> > >  Get:13 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib Translation-en 
> > > [46.9 kB]
> > >  Get:14 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib amd64 Contents 
> > > (deb) [54.6 kB]
> > >  Get:15 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib all Contents 
> > > (deb) [57.3 kB]
> > >  Get:16 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free amd64 Packages 
> > > [93.8 kB]
> > >  Get:17 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free Translation-en 
> > > [91.5 kB]
> > >  Get:18 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free amd64 Contents 
> > > (deb) [75.1 kB]
> > >  Get:19 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free all Contents 
> > > (deb) [888 kB]
> > >  Get:20 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main Sources 
> > > [1,868 B]
> > >  Get:21 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main amd64 
> > > Packages [2,592 B]
> > >  Get:22 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main 
> > > Translation-en [2,343 B]
> > >  Get:23 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main amd64 
> > > 

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Paul van der Vlis]

Op 05-01-2022 om 20:49 schreef Paul van der Vlis:

Op 05-01-2022 om 19:57 schreef Cecil Westerhof:

Paul van der Vlis  writes:


Ik mis hier iets als:
Hit:2 https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security
InRelease

In mijn /etc/apt/sources.list staat deze regel:
deb https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main
contrib non-free

Daarna "apt update; apt dist-upgrade"


Ik heb nu:
 deb http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ bullseye main contrib 
non-free
 deb-src http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ bullseye main contrib 
non-free


 deb http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main 
contrib non-free
 deb-src http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main 
contrib non-free


 deb https://security.debian.org/debian-security 
bullseye-security main contrib non-free
 deb-src https://security.debian.org/debian-security 
bullseye-security main contrib non-free


 deb http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports main 
contrib non-free
 deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports main 
contrib non-free



Maar blijkbaar is er nog steeds iets niet goed, want ik krijg:
 Hit:1 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports InRelease
 Hit:2 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye InRelease
 Hit:3 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates InRelease
 Hit:4 https://security.debian.org/debian-security 
bullseye-security InRelease

 Reading package lists... Done
 Building dependency tree... Done
 Reading state information... Done
 All packages are up to date.


Ik dacht: laat ik het aanpassen naar:
 deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye main contrib non-free
 deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye main contrib non-free

 deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main 
contrib non-free
 deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main 
contrib non-free


 deb https://security.debian.org/debian-security 
bullseye-security main contrib non-free
 deb-src https://security.debian.org/debian-security 
bullseye-security main contrib non-free


 deb http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports main 
contrib non-free
 deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports main 
contrib non-free


Maar ook dat maakt niet uit, want ik krijg:
 Get:1 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye InRelease [116 kB]
 Get:2 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates InRelease 
[39.4 kB]

 Hit:3 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports InRelease
 Hit:4 https://security.debian.org/debian-security 
bullseye-security InRelease
 Get:5 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib Sources [43.0 
kB]
 Get:6 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free Sources 
[80.5 kB]

 Get:7 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main Sources [8,626 kB]
 Get:8 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main amd64 Packages 
[8,183 kB]
 Get:9 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main Translation-en 
[6,243 kB]
 Get:10 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main all Contents 
(deb) [30.9 MB]
 Get:11 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main amd64 Contents 
(deb) [10.2 MB]
 Get:12 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib amd64 
Packages [50.5 kB]
 Get:13 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib 
Translation-en [46.9 kB]
 Get:14 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib amd64 
Contents (deb) [54.6 kB]
 Get:15 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib all Contents 
(deb) [57.3 kB]
 Get:16 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free amd64 
Packages [93.8 kB]
 Get:17 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free 
Translation-en [91.5 kB]
 Get:18 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free amd64 
Contents (deb) [75.1 kB]
 Get:19 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free all 
Contents (deb) [888 kB]
 Get:20 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main Sources 
[1,868 B]
 Get:21 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main amd64 
Packages [2,592 B]
 Get:22 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main 
Translation-en [2,343 B]
 Get:23 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main amd64 
Contents (deb) [960 B]
 Get:24 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main all 
Contents (deb) [16.8 kB]

 Fetched 65.8 MB in 27s (2,459 kB/s)
 Reading package lists... Done
 Building dependency tree... Done
 Reading state information... Done
 All packages are up to date.


Wat doe ik verkeerd?


Eerlijk gezegd weet ik het niet.

Wat ik zou doen is dit, deze code is heel goed getest:
---
now=$(date +"%d-%m-%y")
cd /tmp
wget https://vandervlis.nl/files/sources.list11
mv /etc/apt/sources.list /etc/apt/sources.list-$now
mv sources.list11 /etc/apt/sources.list
apt-get -qq update


Uiteraard heb je hier ook nog iets nodig als:
apt dist-upgrade

Groet,
Paul


--
Paul van der Vlis Linux 

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Paul van der Vlis]

Op 05-01-2022 om 20:49 schreef Paul van der Vlis:

Op 05-01-2022 om 19:57 schreef Cecil Westerhof:

Paul van der Vlis  writes:


Ik mis hier iets als:
Hit:2 https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security
InRelease

In mijn /etc/apt/sources.list staat deze regel:
deb https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main
contrib non-free

Daarna "apt update; apt dist-upgrade"


Ik heb nu:
 deb http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ bullseye main contrib 
non-free
 deb-src http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ bullseye main contrib 
non-free


 deb http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main 
contrib non-free
 deb-src http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main 
contrib non-free


 deb https://security.debian.org/debian-security 
bullseye-security main contrib non-free
 deb-src https://security.debian.org/debian-security 
bullseye-security main contrib non-free


 deb http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports main 
contrib non-free
 deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports main 
contrib non-free



Maar blijkbaar is er nog steeds iets niet goed, want ik krijg:
 Hit:1 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports InRelease
 Hit:2 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye InRelease
 Hit:3 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates InRelease
 Hit:4 https://security.debian.org/debian-security 
bullseye-security InRelease

 Reading package lists... Done
 Building dependency tree... Done
 Reading state information... Done
 All packages are up to date.


Ik dacht: laat ik het aanpassen naar:
 deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye main contrib non-free
 deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye main contrib non-free

 deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main 
contrib non-free
 deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main 
contrib non-free


 deb https://security.debian.org/debian-security 
bullseye-security main contrib non-free
 deb-src https://security.debian.org/debian-security 
bullseye-security main contrib non-free


 deb http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports main 
contrib non-free
 deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports main 
contrib non-free


Maar ook dat maakt niet uit, want ik krijg:
 Get:1 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye InRelease [116 kB]
 Get:2 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates InRelease 
[39.4 kB]

 Hit:3 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports InRelease
 Hit:4 https://security.debian.org/debian-security 
bullseye-security InRelease
 Get:5 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib Sources [43.0 
kB]
 Get:6 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free Sources 
[80.5 kB]

 Get:7 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main Sources [8,626 kB]
 Get:8 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main amd64 Packages 
[8,183 kB]
 Get:9 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main Translation-en 
[6,243 kB]
 Get:10 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main all Contents 
(deb) [30.9 MB]
 Get:11 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main amd64 Contents 
(deb) [10.2 MB]
 Get:12 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib amd64 
Packages [50.5 kB]
 Get:13 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib 
Translation-en [46.9 kB]
 Get:14 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib amd64 
Contents (deb) [54.6 kB]
 Get:15 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib all Contents 
(deb) [57.3 kB]
 Get:16 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free amd64 
Packages [93.8 kB]
 Get:17 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free 
Translation-en [91.5 kB]
 Get:18 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free amd64 
Contents (deb) [75.1 kB]
 Get:19 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free all 
Contents (deb) [888 kB]
 Get:20 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main Sources 
[1,868 B]
 Get:21 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main amd64 
Packages [2,592 B]
 Get:22 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main 
Translation-en [2,343 B]
 Get:23 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main amd64 
Contents (deb) [960 B]
 Get:24 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main all 
Contents (deb) [16.8 kB]

 Fetched 65.8 MB in 27s (2,459 kB/s)
 Reading package lists... Done
 Building dependency tree... Done
 Reading state information... Done
 All packages are up to date.


Wat doe ik verkeerd?


Eerlijk gezegd weet ik het niet.

Wat ik zou doen is dit, deze code is heel goed getest:
---
now=$(date +"%d-%m-%y")
cd /tmp
wget https://vandervlis.nl/files/sources.list11
mv /etc/apt/sources.list /etc/apt/sources.list-$now
mv sources.list11 /etc/apt/sources.list
apt-get -qq update
---

Er zou verder wat mis kunnen zijn met je apt database, je zou dit kunnen 
proberen:

---
mv 

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Paul van der Vlis]

Op 05-01-2022 om 19:57 schreef Cecil Westerhof:

Paul van der Vlis  writes:


Ik mis hier iets als:
Hit:2 https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security
InRelease

In mijn /etc/apt/sources.list staat deze regel:
deb https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main
contrib non-free

Daarna "apt update; apt dist-upgrade"


Ik heb nu:
 deb http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ bullseye main contrib non-free
 deb-src http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ bullseye main contrib non-free

 deb http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main contrib 
non-free
 deb-src http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main contrib 
non-free

 deb https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main 
contrib non-free
 deb-src https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main 
contrib non-free

 deb http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports main contrib 
non-free
 deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports main contrib 
non-free


Maar blijkbaar is er nog steeds iets niet goed, want ik krijg:
 Hit:1 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports InRelease
 Hit:2 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye InRelease
 Hit:3 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates InRelease
 Hit:4 https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security 
InRelease
 Reading package lists... Done
 Building dependency tree... Done
 Reading state information... Done
 All packages are up to date.


Ik dacht: laat ik het aanpassen naar:
 deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye main contrib non-free
 deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye main contrib non-free

 deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main contrib 
non-free
 deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main contrib 
non-free

 deb https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main 
contrib non-free
 deb-src https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main 
contrib non-free

 deb http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports main contrib 
non-free
 deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports main contrib 
non-free

Maar ook dat maakt niet uit, want ik krijg:
 Get:1 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye InRelease [116 kB]
 Get:2 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates InRelease [39.4 kB]
 Hit:3 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports InRelease
 Hit:4 https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security 
InRelease
 Get:5 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib Sources [43.0 kB]
 Get:6 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free Sources [80.5 kB]
 Get:7 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main Sources [8,626 kB]
 Get:8 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main amd64 Packages [8,183 kB]
 Get:9 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main Translation-en [6,243 kB]
 Get:10 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main all Contents (deb) [30.9 
MB]
 Get:11 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main amd64 Contents (deb) 
[10.2 MB]
 Get:12 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib amd64 Packages [50.5 
kB]
 Get:13 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib Translation-en [46.9 
kB]
 Get:14 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib amd64 Contents (deb) 
[54.6 kB]
 Get:15 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib all Contents (deb) 
[57.3 kB]
 Get:16 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free amd64 Packages [93.8 
kB]
 Get:17 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free Translation-en [91.5 
kB]
 Get:18 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free amd64 Contents (deb) 
[75.1 kB]
 Get:19 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free all Contents (deb) 
[888 kB]
 Get:20 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main Sources [1,868 B]
 Get:21 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main amd64 Packages 
[2,592 B]
 Get:22 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main Translation-en 
[2,343 B]
 Get:23 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main amd64 Contents 
(deb) [960 B]
 Get:24 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main all Contents 
(deb) [16.8 kB]
 Fetched 65.8 MB in 27s (2,459 kB/s)
 Reading package lists... Done
 Building dependency tree... Done
 Reading state information... Done
 All packages are up to date.


Wat doe ik verkeerd?


Eerlijk gezegd weet ik het niet.

Wat ik zou doen is dit, deze code is heel goed getest:
---
now=$(date +"%d-%m-%y")
cd /tmp
wget https://vandervlis.nl/files/sources.list11
mv /etc/apt/sources.list /etc/apt/sources.list-$now
mv sources.list11 /etc/apt/sources.list
apt-get -qq update
---

Er zou verder wat mis kunnen zijn met je apt database, je zou dit kunnen 
proberen:

---
mv /var/lib/apt/lists /var/lib/apt/lists-backup
apt update
apt dist-upgrade

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Diederik de Haas]

On Wednesday, 5 January 2022 20:18:42 CET Diederik de Haas wrote:
> Er is wel iets anders dat me opvalt:
> https://deb.debian.org/debian-security/dists/bullseye-security/main/Contents
> -* is maar 20 bytes groot, terwijl die veel groter zijn op
> https://deb.debian.org/debian/dists/bullseye/main/Contents-*

Blijkt ook bij andere security releases zo te zijn, dus ga ik er vooralsnog 
uit dat het loos alarm was.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Thunderbird not allowing local accounts

[Jeremy Nicoll]

On Wed, 5 Jan 2022, at 13:35, Paul M. Foster wrote:
> Folks:
>
> I just restarted my machine, and am using Thunderbird 91.4.1 (the 
> latest) 64 bit on Debian 11. I didn't reinstall Thunderbird or upgrade 
> it...

I've never used TB so these questions might be crazy ...

Is TB able to import a set of mails stored in a folder somewhere 
else on a machine?

If it is, is that able to be scheduled somehow - eg via cron?

Does TB have filter capabilities that affect what happens with 
mails as they're imported, perhaps separately from mails
that are fetched from somewhere?

If those work, would one need a separate mechanism to get 
the mails currently accumulating in "mail spool" or wherever
into (exported?) a folder from which the import could pick 
them up?

I know that if this affected me I'd be hugely upset having to 
consider abandoning one MUA and learning all the ins
of another one, and would - in the short term anyway - prefer
to find some way of making TB still see the mails concerned.

-- 
Jeremy Nicoll - my opinions are my own.

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Diederik de Haas]

On Wednesday, 5 January 2022 19:05:54 CET Cecil Westerhof wrote:
> Hij zou er moeten zijn, maar is er blijkbaar nog niet. Ik heb (zoals
> eerder geadviseerd) de nieuwe esr versie apart geïnstalleerd. Zodra de
> nieuwe er daadwerkelijk is, verwijder ik de aparte versie weer.
> 
> Maar ik blijf het vreemd vinden dat er al een poosje geen updates zijn
> gewest.

Versie 91.4.1esr-1~deb11u1 van firefox-esr zou beschikbaar moeten zijn volgens
https://deb.debian.org/debian-security/dists/bullseye-security/main/binary-amd64/Packages.xz

Er is wel iets anders dat me opvalt:
https://deb.debian.org/debian-security/dists/bullseye-security/main/Contents-*
is maar 20 bytes groot, terwijl die veel groter zijn op
https://deb.debian.org/debian/dists/bullseye/main/Contents-*

> Is er een manier om te zien wanneer ik mijn laatste update/upgrade
> heeft plaatsgevonden.

In /var/log/dpkg.log[.*] zou je dat moeten kunnen terugvinden.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

issue with smart

[Hans]

Hi folks,

I have a little problerm I am hasseling with, maybe you can help.

On my 32-bit debian/stable (EEEPC) is popping a window up, that is telling me, 
that I need root rights, because it can not write the smart data into the disk 
(or wherever).

Does someone know this issue? I checked and the only "smart" similar demon is 
smartd, and this one running with root-rights.

It also does not help, when I enter the correct root password, the window is 
popping up again and again.

There is another hint: This issue only appear, when running the window manager 
LXQT, but maybe my other window manager PLASMA is suppressing this issue.

I also could not discover, why or which process is starting a GUI-window, so 
this is completely strange for me.

Don't know, if this is a bug. Did someone else see this behaviour somewhen in 
the past? This isssue is not new on my system, it does it for a real long 
while (about half a year or so).

Thanks for any hints.

Best regards

Hans  

Re: (deb-cat) Comunitat de PL a les administracions publiques

[Joan]

És interessant, per no reinventar la roda...

-- 
Joan Cervan i Andreu
http://personal.calbasi.net

"El meu paper no és transformar el món ni l'home sinó, potser, el de
ser útil, des del meu lloc, als pocs valors sense els quals un món no
val la pena viure'l" A. Camus

i pels que teniu fe:
"Déu no és la Veritat, la Veritat és Déu"
Gandhi

"Donar exemple no és la principal manera d'influir sobre els altres; és
l'única manera" Albert Einstein

“Lluitarem contra el fort mentre siguem febles i contra nosaltres
mateixos quan siguem forts” Lluís Maria Xirinacs


El Wed, 5 Jan 2022 09:30:09 +0100
Narcis Garcia  va escriure:

> Comento que, seguint l'article 17 del Reial Decret 4/2010 i l'article 
> 158 de la Llei 40/2015, está en funcionament aquest centre de
> publicació i intercanvi de programari lliure de i per a les
> administracions públiques i usuaris a Espanya:
> 
> https://administracionelectronica.gob.es/ctt/
> 
> Seria bo que més administracions (com l'autonòmica) apostessin per 
> aquest model en comptes de subcontractar productes de dubtosa
> qualitat, escassa interoperativitat i nul·la transparència.
> 
> Haig d'assenyalar que hi ha paquets que s'enuncien compatibles amb 
> Ubuntu en comptes de dir «Debian i derivats».



-- 
Joan Cervan i Andreu
http://personal.calbasi.net

"El meu paper no és transformar el món ni l'home sinó, potser, el de
ser útil, des del meu lloc, als pocs valors sense els quals un món no
val la pena viure'l" A. Camus

i pels que teniu fe:
"Déu no és la Veritat, la Veritat és Déu"
Gandhi

"Donar exemple no és la principal manera d'influir sobre els altres; és
l'única manera" Albert Einstein

“Lluitarem contra el fort mentre siguem febles i contra nosaltres
mateixos quan siguem forts” Lluís Maria Xirinacs

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Cecil Westerhof]

Paul van der Vlis  writes:

> Ik mis hier iets als:
> Hit:2 https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security
> InRelease
>
> In mijn /etc/apt/sources.list staat deze regel:
> deb https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main
> contrib non-free
>
> Daarna "apt update; apt dist-upgrade"

Ik heb nu:
deb http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ bullseye main contrib non-free
deb-src http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ bullseye main contrib non-free

deb http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main contrib 
non-free
deb-src http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main contrib 
non-free

deb https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main 
contrib non-free
deb-src https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main 
contrib non-free

deb http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports main contrib 
non-free
deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports main contrib 
non-free


Maar blijkbaar is er nog steeds iets niet goed, want ik krijg:
Hit:1 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports InRelease
Hit:2 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye InRelease
Hit:3 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates InRelease
Hit:4 https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security 
InRelease
Reading package lists... Done 
Building dependency tree... Done
Reading state information... Done
All packages are up to date.


Ik dacht: laat ik het aanpassen naar:
deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye main contrib non-free
deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye main contrib non-free

deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main contrib non-free
deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bullseye-updates main contrib non-free

deb https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main 
contrib non-free
deb-src https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main 
contrib non-free

deb http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports main contrib 
non-free
deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports main contrib 
non-free

Maar ook dat maakt niet uit, want ik krijg:
Get:1 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye InRelease [116 kB]
Get:2 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates InRelease [39.4 kB]
Hit:3 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports InRelease
Hit:4 https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security 
InRelease
Get:5 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib Sources [43.0 kB]
Get:6 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free Sources [80.5 kB]
Get:7 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main Sources [8,626 kB]
Get:8 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main amd64 Packages [8,183 kB]
Get:9 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main Translation-en [6,243 kB]
Get:10 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main all Contents (deb) [30.9 
MB]
Get:11 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main amd64 Contents (deb) 
[10.2 MB]
Get:12 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib amd64 Packages [50.5 
kB]
Get:13 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib Translation-en [46.9 
kB]
Get:14 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib amd64 Contents (deb) 
[54.6 kB]
Get:15 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib all Contents (deb) 
[57.3 kB]
Get:16 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free amd64 Packages [93.8 
kB]
Get:17 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free Translation-en [91.5 
kB]
Get:18 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free amd64 Contents (deb) 
[75.1 kB]
Get:19 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free all Contents (deb) 
[888 kB]
Get:20 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main Sources [1,868 B]
Get:21 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main amd64 Packages 
[2,592 B]
Get:22 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main Translation-en 
[2,343 B]
Get:23 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main amd64 Contents 
(deb) [960 B]
Get:24 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates/main all Contents 
(deb) [16.8 kB]
Fetched 65.8 MB in 27s (2,459 kB/s)
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree... Done
Reading state information... Done
All packages are up to date.


Wat doe ik verkeerd?

-- 
Cecil Westerhof
Senior Software Engineer
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/cecilwesterhof

Re: Thunderbird not allowing local accounts

[Charles Curley]

On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 09:44:24 -0500
"Paul M. Foster"  wrote:

> Can anyone recommend another MUA which uses mbox format and is 
> relatively easy to configure?

Claws-mail and mutt for two.

Or, if you want to stick with your investment in Thunderbird, use
dovecot to set up a local imap server.

-- 
Does anybody read signatures any more?

https://charlescurley.com
https://charlescurley.com/blog/

Re: [SOLVED] Re: Firefox: Warning: Potential Security Risk Ahead for the USPS.com

[tomas]

On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 12:41:23PM -0500, Celejar wrote:

[...]

> The configuration I'm talking about is as follows: the browser makes
> ordinary, unencrypted DNS requests to the Pi-hole, over a trusted
> network

If the browser decides to make the DNS requests over HTTPS (DoH [1],
that's what we are talking about), the DNS server in your Pi-hole doesn't
even get to see those requests.

> (your LAN, or a VPN). HTTPS isn't necessary here insofar as you
> trust your own network to be secure. (And if you're really worried about
> intruders [...]

No, no. I'm not worried about those things. I'm worried that the
browsers do their own thing to do name lookup so they escape my control
(be it via /etc/hosts, be it via an own DNS server, local or Pi-hole).

> https://www.reddit.com/r/pihole/comments/ku0i8k/configuring_dnsoverhttps_on_pihole/

Again: I'm not that much concerned about my lookup's privacy. The
Pi-hole having an option to do DoH lookups is fine. But do I trust my
browser to not do direct DoH lookups all by itself, bypassing my Pi-hole
(or whatever I've set up as a controlled DNS)? What about its next
version?

Cheers

[1] Browser folks have decided that making DNS requests over HTTP(S) is
   much more secure than over the "traditional" avenue. In a way, they
   are right. In another they are horribly wrong-
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNS_over_HTTPS 

-- 
t


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Thunderbird not allowing local accounts

[paulf]

On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 11:58:09 -0500
Celejar  wrote:

> On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 09:44:24 -0500
> "Paul M. Foster"  wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
> > Thanks for the info. Mozilla Foundation is seriously annoying me
> > lately.
> > 
> > Can anyone recommend another MUA which uses mbox format and is 
> > relatively easy to configure?
> 
> Sylpheed?
> 
> Celejar
> 

It's starting to look that way. Actually, I'm looking at claws-mail.

-- 
Paul M. Foster
http://noferblatz.com
http://quillandmouse.com

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Paul van der Vlis]

Op 05-01-2022 om 19:25 schreef Paul van der Vlis:

Op 05-01-2022 om 17:14 schreef Cecil Westerhof:

Geert Stappers  writes:


Previous-Subject: Re: https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/rustc-mozilla
In-Reply-To: <87sfu2uve7@munus.decebal.nl>

On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 03:09:20PM +0100, Cecil Westerhof wrote:

Paul van der Vlis  writes:


Er is overigens nog steeds geen nieuwe firefox-esr voor Debian10,
gelukkig wel voor Debian9 en Debian11.


Weet je dat zeker? Ik heb net zowel 'apt update' als 'apt-get update'
gedaan, maar kreeg geen nieuwe firefox-esr.


Maar het zou ook aan mijn systeem kunnen liggen, want ik heb al een
poosje geen updates meer gehad. Waar zou ik naar moeten kijken?
Uitvoer van 'apt update':
 Hit:1 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports InRelease
 Hit:2 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye InRelease
 Hit:3 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates InRelease
 . 


Hij is er al sinds 19 december voor Debian11:
https://www.debian.org/security/2021/dsa-5026

Groet,
Paul

--
Paul van der Vlis Linux systeembeheer Groningen
https://vandervlis.nl/

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Paul van der Vlis]

Op 05-01-2022 om 17:14 schreef Cecil Westerhof:

Geert Stappers  writes:


Previous-Subject: Re: https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/rustc-mozilla
In-Reply-To: <87sfu2uve7@munus.decebal.nl>

On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 03:09:20PM +0100, Cecil Westerhof wrote:

Paul van der Vlis  writes:


Er is overigens nog steeds geen nieuwe firefox-esr voor Debian10,
gelukkig wel voor Debian9 en Debian11.


Weet je dat zeker? Ik heb net zowel 'apt update' als 'apt-get update'
gedaan, maar kreeg geen nieuwe firefox-esr.


Maar het zou ook aan mijn systeem kunnen liggen, want ik heb al een
poosje geen updates meer gehad. Waar zou ik naar moeten kijken?
Uitvoer van 'apt update':
 Hit:1 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports InRelease
 Hit:2 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye InRelease
 Hit:3 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates InRelease
 . 


Ik mis hier iets als:
Hit:2 https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security 
InRelease


In mijn /etc/apt/sources.list staat deze regel:
deb https://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main 
contrib non-free


Daarna "apt update; apt dist-upgrade"


Welke firefox-esr heb je nu? (dpkg -l firefox-esr)


De oude:
 in firefox: 78.15.0esr
 dpkg -l:firefox-esr78.15.0esr-1~deb11u1 amd64Mozilla 
Firefox web browser - Extended Support Release (ESR)

En i.i.g. voor LinkedIn heb ik 91.4.1esr nodig.


Hij is er voor Debian9 en Debian11 (Bullseye), niet voor Debian10.
https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/firefox-esr

De website is niet bijgewerkt, ik mis de rode tekst "security":
https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=firefox-esr=names=all=all
Zulk soort fouten zie ik vaker, zal het handwerk zijn?

Groet,
Paul



--
Paul van der Vlis Linux systeembeheer Groningen
https://vandervlis.nl/

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Cecil Westerhof]

Geert Stappers  writes:

> On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 05:14:48PM +0100, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
>> Geert Stappers writes:
>> > On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 03:09:20PM +0100, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
>> >> Paul van der Vlis writes:
>> >> 
>> >> > Er is overigens nog steeds geen nieuwe firefox-esr voor Debian10,
>> >> > gelukkig wel voor Debian9 en Debian11.
>> >> 
>> >> Weet je dat zeker? Ik heb net zowel 'apt update' als 'apt-get update'
>> >> gedaan, maar kreeg geen nieuwe firefox-esr.
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >> Maar het zou ook aan mijn systeem kunnen liggen, want ik heb al een
>> >> poosje geen updates meer gehad. Waar zou ik naar moeten kijken?
>> >> Uitvoer van 'apt update':
>> >> Hit:1 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports InRelease
>> >> Hit:2 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye InRelease
>> >> Hit:3 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates InRelease
>> >> . 
>> >
>> > Welke firefox-esr heb je nu? (dpkg -l firefox-esr)
>> 
>> firefox-esr 78.15.0esr-1~deb11u1 amd64 Mozilla Firefox web browser -
>> Extended Support Release (ESR)
>
> Volgens https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/firefox-esr is die van 2021-10-09.
> Dus nog geen twee maanden oud.
>  
>
>> En i.i.g. voor LinkedIn heb ik 91.4.1esr nodig.
>
> Dat lees ik als "Voor 'n website zou ik graag 91.4.1esr gebruiken".
>
> Paul van der Vlis schreef
>> >> > Er is overigens nog steeds geen nieuwe firefox-esr voor Debian10,
>> >> > gelukkig wel voor Debian9 en Debian11.
> En volgens https://tracker.debian.org is er inderdaad
> een firefox-esr 91.4.1esr-1~deb11u1.
>
> Advies:
> * Ga met een webbrowser naar
> http://security.debian.org/debian-security/pool/main/f/firefox-esr/?C=M;O=D
> * Scroll naar 2021-12-19   ( is ergens op 10% )
> * Wijs met de muis de gewenste 
> firefox-esr_91.4.1esr-1~deb11u1_ARCHITECTURE.deb aan
> * Rechts click
> * Selecteer "Kopieer Koppeling"
> * Ga naar shell
> * wget  
> * sudo dpkg -i firefox-esr*deb
>
> Verzoek: Laat weten hoe het ging.

Hij zou er moeten zijn, maar is er blijkbaar nog niet. Ik heb (zoals
eerder geadviseerd) de nieuwe esr versie apart geïnstalleerd. Zodra de
nieuwe er daadwerkelijk is, verwijder ik de aparte versie weer.

Maar ik blijf het vreemd vinden dat er al een poosje geen updates zijn
gewest.
Is er een manier om te zien wanneer ik mijn laatste update/upgrade
heeft plaatsgevonden.

-- 
Cecil Westerhof
Senior Software Engineer
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/cecilwesterhof

Re: Dragging tabs in Google Chrome 97

[Greg Wooledge]

On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 05:16:27PM -, Curt wrote:
> On 2022-01-05, David Wright  wrote:
> >> 
> >> As of this morning's update, dragging and dropping items in this game
> >> doesn't work either.  The dragging part appears to work correctly, as
> >> far as I can tell -- there is visual feedback that a thing is being
> >> moved as I drag with the mouse.  But when I release the button to "drop"
> >> the thing, it simply goes back to its original position.  No rearranging
> >> occurs.
> >
> > Not to say it's relevant or irrelevant, but that's the behaviour of
> > dragging any image in FF: let go and it puts it back where it was.
> > What I don't know is whether an item that's drag-AND-droppable has
> > to be marked in some way, which could be missing; or whether it's
> > just the dropping mechanism that's broken.
> 
> I just updated my Chrome to 97 but am not seeing the behavior Greg is.
> He could try the usual stuff, like "Reset settings" in Settings,
> verifying if the problem occurs in incognito mode or with another
> profile, disabling extensions, etc. Or even maybe exploring the
> possibility of a hardware snafu with the keyboard and/or mouse.

Based on the results of my earlier Google searches, I tried incognito
mode (no luck), disabling extensions (no luck), and unplugging/replugging
my USB keyboard (no luck).

I did not try a new profile, nor did I try resetting all settings, the
latter of which sounds horribly destructive.

Another post in this thread claimed that the bug may be related to using
"system title bars and borders", which I am doing.  However, disabling
that and then restarting Chrome does not fix it.  So there's some other
piece involved.

Re: [SOLVED] Re: Firefox: Warning: Potential Security Risk Ahead for the USPS.com

[Celejar]

On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 18:20:23 +0100
 wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 08:43:23AM -0500, Celejar wrote:
> > On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 06:10:48 +0100
> >  wrote:
> > 
> > > On Tue, Jan 04, 2022 at 04:05:11PM -0500, Celejar wrote:
> > > 
> > > [...]
> > > 
> > > > One way "to combine DoH with resolving 14,000 addresses to 127.0.0.1"
> > > > is by using Pi-hole. Some people have *millions* of domains blacklisted
> > > > in Pi-hole:
> > > 
> > > Pi-hole won't help unles it also does HTTPS proxying (that means it
> > > would have to play MITM). As far as I know it "just" does conventional
> > > DNS proxying (which is a great thing to do, mind you).
> > 
> > Why won't it help? What won't it help with?
> 
> (See also Dan's response: it seems that a compliant DoH client first
> sends a local DNS request first, so you might have a handle through
> this)
> 
> With this caveat: how would you intercept a DNS request over HTTPS if
> not by proxying HTTPS traffic? And that is exactly what MITM means.

The configuration I'm talking about is as follows: the browser makes
ordinary, unencrypted DNS requests to the Pi-hole, over a trusted
network (your LAN, or a VPN). HTTPS isn't necessary here insofar as you
trust your own network to be secure. (And if you're really worried about
intruders and sniffers inside your network, you can always run Pi-hole
on the same system as the browser itself (possibly in a container or
VM), although that'll require dedicating some resources to the Pi-hole
installation.)

The Pi-hole then either blocks the request (if the address is on its
blocklists), or looks it up via DoH.

See, e.g., here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/pihole/comments/ku0i8k/configuring_dnsoverhttps_on_pihole/

Celejar

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Geert Stappers]

On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 05:14:48PM +0100, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
> Geert Stappers writes:
> > On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 03:09:20PM +0100, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
> >> Paul van der Vlis writes:
> >> 
> >> > Er is overigens nog steeds geen nieuwe firefox-esr voor Debian10,
> >> > gelukkig wel voor Debian9 en Debian11.
> >> 
> >> Weet je dat zeker? Ik heb net zowel 'apt update' als 'apt-get update'
> >> gedaan, maar kreeg geen nieuwe firefox-esr.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Maar het zou ook aan mijn systeem kunnen liggen, want ik heb al een
> >> poosje geen updates meer gehad. Waar zou ik naar moeten kijken?
> >> Uitvoer van 'apt update':
> >> Hit:1 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports InRelease
> >> Hit:2 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye InRelease
> >> Hit:3 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates InRelease
> >> . 
> >
> > Welke firefox-esr heb je nu? (dpkg -l firefox-esr)
> 
> firefox-esr78.15.0esr-1~deb11u1 amd64Mozilla Firefox web browser 
> - Extended Support Release (ESR)

Volgens https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/firefox-esr is die van 2021-10-09.
Dus nog geen twee maanden oud.
 

> En i.i.g. voor LinkedIn heb ik 91.4.1esr nodig.

Dat lees ik als "Voor 'n website zou ik graag 91.4.1esr gebruiken".

Paul van der Vlis schreef
> >> > Er is overigens nog steeds geen nieuwe firefox-esr voor Debian10,
> >> > gelukkig wel voor Debian9 en Debian11.
En volgens https://tracker.debian.org is er inderdaad
een firefox-esr 91.4.1esr-1~deb11u1.

Advies:
* Ga met een webbrowser naar 
http://security.debian.org/debian-security/pool/main/f/firefox-esr/?C=M;O=D
* Scroll naar 2021-12-19   ( is ergens op 10% )
* Wijs met de muis de gewenste firefox-esr_91.4.1esr-1~deb11u1_ARCHITECTURE.deb 
aan
* Rechts click
* Selecteer "Kopieer Koppeling"
* Ga naar shell
* wget  
* sudo dpkg -i firefox-esr*deb

Verzoek: Laat weten hoe het ging.


Groeten
Geert Stappers
-- 
Silence is hard to parse

Re: [SOLVED] Re: Firefox: Warning: Potential Security Risk Ahead for the USPS.com

[tomas]

On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 08:43:23AM -0500, Celejar wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 06:10:48 +0100
>  wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Jan 04, 2022 at 04:05:11PM -0500, Celejar wrote:
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > One way "to combine DoH with resolving 14,000 addresses to 127.0.0.1"
> > > is by using Pi-hole. Some people have *millions* of domains blacklisted
> > > in Pi-hole:
> > 
> > Pi-hole won't help unles it also does HTTPS proxying (that means it
> > would have to play MITM). As far as I know it "just" does conventional
> > DNS proxying (which is a great thing to do, mind you).
> 
> Why won't it help? What won't it help with?

(See also Dan's response: it seems that a compliant DoH client first
sends a local DNS request first, so you might have a handle through
this)

With this caveat: how would you intercept a DNS request over HTTPS if
not by proxying HTTPS traffic? And that is exactly what MITM means.

Cheers
-- 
t


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Single broken package blocks whole package management

[Dan Ritter]

Urs Thuermann wrote: 
> "Andrew M.A. Cater"  writes:
> 
> > Raspbian _isn't_ Debian. Wolfram-engine is a third party (commercial) app -
> > Wolfram Mathematica which the Raspberry Pi foundation licences with a 
> > special educational arrangement.
> > 
> > You might be able to force a reinstall of wolfram-engine to produce
> > something consistent to then remove but this is probably wasted
> > effort.
> 
> Yes, and my question should be about dpkg & friends how to get out of
> that state where a single corrupted package blocks everything.
> 

Here's the dangerous way:

In /var/lib/dpkg/info, dpkg and therefore apt keep the install
and removal scripts for all packages.

You could download a copy of the wolfram-engine .deb manually,
use ar to pull out a copy of the package list, confirm that it
is unmunged and replace the broken one in /var/lib/dpkg/info.

Then remove it, do your upgrades, and try reinstalling it.

-dsr-

Re: Dragging tabs in Google Chrome 97

[Curt]

On 2022-01-05, David Wright  wrote:
>> 
>> As of this morning's update, dragging and dropping items in this game
>> doesn't work either.  The dragging part appears to work correctly, as
>> far as I can tell -- there is visual feedback that a thing is being
>> moved as I drag with the mouse.  But when I release the button to "drop"
>> the thing, it simply goes back to its original position.  No rearranging
>> occurs.
>
> Not to say it's relevant or irrelevant, but that's the behaviour of
> dragging any image in FF: let go and it puts it back where it was.
> What I don't know is whether an item that's drag-AND-droppable has
> to be marked in some way, which could be missing; or whether it's
> just the dropping mechanism that's broken.

I just updated my Chrome to 97 but am not seeing the behavior Greg is.
He could try the usual stuff, like "Reset settings" in Settings,
verifying if the problem occurs in incognito mode or with another
profile, disabling extensions, etc. Or even maybe exploring the
possibility of a hardware snafu with the keyboard and/or mouse.

> Cheers, David.
>
>

Re: Dragging tabs in Google Chrome 97

[Dan Ritter]

Greg Wooledge wrote: 
> This morning, I did my normal apt-get update/upgrade, and this brought
> in a new version of google-chrome-stable
> 
> ii  google-chrome-stable 97.0.4692.71-1 amd64The web browser from 
> Google
> 

quoting from
https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1279532=tab%20move=2

> Stable (96.0.4664.110): Works as expected tabs can be dragged
> out and dragged back to window.
> Beta (97.0.4692.45): Bug occurs if using system title and
> borders, disabling them makes tab work as expected.
> Dev (98.0.4750.0):  Bug occurs if using system title and
> borders, disabling them makes tab work as expected.
> 
> Not in the video but also tested was KDE Neo (dev version), were
> bug occurs regard regardless of system title and borders being
> enabled.
> 
> So recapping:
> * Bug is present in both Gnome and KDE Plasma
> * It's not a Dev branch bug but a beta branch one
> * It always affects KDE Plasma, but will only affect Gnome when
> * using system title bar and borders

In this case, beta means 97, which is now the stable release.

They'll have to solve it in Chrome.

-dsr-

Re: Single broken package blocks whole package management

[Greg Wooledge]

On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 05:26:21PM +0100, Urs Thuermann wrote:
> Yes, and my question should be about dpkg & friends how to get out of
> that state where a single corrupted package blocks everything.

Use dpkg to purge it.  With force if needed.

dpkg --force-help

Re: Dragging tabs in Google Chrome 97

[Dan Ritter]

Greg Wooledge wrote: 
> This morning, I did my normal apt-get update/upgrade, and this brought
> in a new version of google-chrome-stable
> 
> ii  google-chrome-stable 97.0.4692.71-1 amd64The web browser from 
> Google
> 
> After restarting in the new version of Chrome, I am unable to move
> tabs around within a window.  Any attempt to drag a tab to the left or
> the right immediately causes the creation of a new window, with the
> tab that I was trying to move inside the new window.
> 
> I googled (ironically) the problem, and of course because Chrome 97 is
> so new, there are no useful pages in the search results yet.  The nearest
> I found were some older reports of similar issues.

I see reports now from Ubuntu and Manjaro, so I'm pretty sure
this is Google's issue. Downgrading to

https://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/pool/main/g/google-chrome-stable/google-chrome-stable_96.0.4664.110-1_amd64.deb

is reported to work. Eventually, presumably, Google will fix it.

-dsr-

Re: Thunderbird not allowing local accounts

[Celejar]

On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 09:44:24 -0500
"Paul M. Foster"  wrote:

...

> Thanks for the info. Mozilla Foundation is seriously annoying me lately.
> 
> Can anyone recommend another MUA which uses mbox format and is 
> relatively easy to configure?

Sylpheed?

Celejar

Re: Dragging tabs in Google Chrome 97

[Greg Wooledge]

On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 11:13:46AM -0500, Cindy Sue Causey wrote:
> I don't have answers toward a permanent resolution but still wanted to
> suggest that CTRL+SHIFT+[pageUP/pageDOWN] works for me to
> alternatively move tabs around one position at a time. Am hoping that
> also works (universally) in Chrome, too.

Thanks!  That will do nicely as a workaround.  It's sure as hell better
than having to put all the *rest* of the tabs into a new window and then
move them back to the original window.

I wonder if there's any documentation in the world that describes all
of these magic key combos that browsers use, or if they're all handed
down by word of mouth like this.

(Won't help me in my incremental game, but that's OK.)

Re: baja

[quintocor...@gmail.com]

wuajajaja

El mié, 5 ene 2022 a las 3:40, Camaleón () escribió:

> El 2022-01-04 a las 22:23 -0300, federico montaldo escribió:
> > Por favor saquenme de la lista
>
> Era un hombre atrapado por la lista... ¡suéltame lista!
>
> https://www.debian.org/MailingLists/unsubscribe>
>
> (en honor a una de las muchas joyas de Les Luthiers)
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGpISZfYKO0
>
> Saludos,
>
> --
> Camaleón
>
>

-- 
   "Cristo Viene pronto"
   «1 Tesalonicenses 4:17»

Re: Single broken package blocks whole package management

[Urs Thuermann]

"Andrew M.A. Cater"  writes:

> Raspbian _isn't_ Debian. Wolfram-engine is a third party (commercial) app -
> Wolfram Mathematica which the Raspberry Pi foundation licences with a 
> special educational arrangement.
> 
> You might be able to force a reinstall of wolfram-engine to produce
> something consistent to then remove but this is probably wasted
> effort.

Yes, and my question should be about dpkg & friends how to get out of
that state where a single corrupted package blocks everything.

> Rather than trying to update from 8 to 9, unless you have significant
> data invested, I would suggest simply downloading a copy of the latest
> release of Raspberry Pi OS based on Debian 11.
> 
> Although I can guarantee that Debian should be upgradable between major
> releases, I can't be sure for other Debian derivatives.

I hoped for the chain of upgrades to work since that would be easier
than installing from scratch.  Since that Raspberry Pi is head-less in
the room next-door.  I need to pull the SD card, write the image onto
it, put the Raspi to some screen at my desk, find a keyboard etc.  Not
much of a problem, but dist-upgrading through remote-login would be
less effort.  Now, I'll do a installation from scratch.

> As ever, for Debian: https://wiki.debian.org/DontBreakDebian

Yes, sure.  AFAIK, nothing of that sort has been done to that Raspi,
at least, as long as I was the only root on it.  I gave to my son a
year ago or so, but I think he didn't anything wrong to it.

> Debian installers which will install something closer to vanilla Debian
> are available - but don't include Wolfram's software. They're unofficial
> in that they're dependnet on non-free software to install. See 
> https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/unofficial/raspi/

I think I'll give it a try.  On one of my old Raspis idling in my home
network or lying around and gathering dust.  Especially the 64 bit
Debian should be interesting on my Raspberry Pi 3.  So thank for that
pointer and suggestion.

urs

Re: Re: baja

[Juan Motorola]

A lo mejor ya lo sabe todo!..
Y eso sí que es respetable.

Re: Welke firefox-esr

[Cecil Westerhof]

Geert Stappers  writes:

> Previous-Subject: Re: https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/rustc-mozilla
> In-Reply-To: <87sfu2uve7@munus.decebal.nl>
>
> On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 03:09:20PM +0100, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
>> Paul van der Vlis  writes:
>> 
>> > Er is overigens nog steeds geen nieuwe firefox-esr voor Debian10,
>> > gelukkig wel voor Debian9 en Debian11.
>> 
>> Weet je dat zeker? Ik heb net zowel 'apt update' als 'apt-get update'
>> gedaan, maar kreeg geen nieuwe firefox-esr.
>> 
>> 
>> Maar het zou ook aan mijn systeem kunnen liggen, want ik heb al een
>> poosje geen updates meer gehad. Waar zou ik naar moeten kijken?
>> Uitvoer van 'apt update':
>> Hit:1 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports InRelease
>> Hit:2 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye InRelease
>> Hit:3 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates InRelease
>> . 
>
> Welke firefox-esr heb je nu? (dpkg -l firefox-esr)

De oude:
in firefox: 78.15.0esr
dpkg -l:firefox-esr78.15.0esr-1~deb11u1 amd64Mozilla 
Firefox web browser - Extended Support Release (ESR)

En i.i.g. voor LinkedIn heb ik 91.4.1esr nodig.

-- 
Cecil Westerhof
Senior Software Engineer
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/cecilwesterhof

Re: Dragging tabs in Google Chrome 97

[Cindy Sue Causey]

On 1/5/22, Greg Wooledge  wrote:
> This morning, I did my normal apt-get update/upgrade, and this brought
> in a new version of google-chrome-stable
>
> ii  google-chrome-stable 97.0.4692.71-1 amd64The web browser from
> Google
>
> After restarting in the new version of Chrome, I am unable to move
> tabs around within a window.  Any attempt to drag a tab to the left or
> the right immediately causes the creation of a new window, with the
> tab that I was trying to move inside the new window.
>
> >From there, if I right-click the offending tab inside the new window,
> there's an option to "Move tab to a new window".  I can use this to
> send the tab back to its original window -- but now it's on the far
> right.
>
> I googled (ironically) the problem, and of course because Chrome 97 is
> so new, there are no useful pages in the search results yet.  The nearest
> I found were some older reports of similar issues.


I don't have answers toward a permanent resolution but still wanted to
suggest that CTRL+SHIFT+[pageUP/pageDOWN] works for me to
alternatively move tabs around one position at a time. Am hoping that
also works (universally) in Chrome, too.

That's my go-to route when I experience similar issues with the tabs
detaching. In my case, it's about elderly shaky fingers (Human error),
low computer memory, and such that cause that highly aggravating issue
here. :)


> I know this isn't the *best* place to ask for help with proprietary
> browsers, but this is a pretty popular one, so there's a chance.  Has
> anyone else encountered this problem?  More importantly, does anyone
> know how to *fix* it?
>
> Being unable to rearrange tabs in a sane manner is EXTREMELY irritating.


Cindy :)
-- 
Cindy-Sue Causey
Talking Rock, Pickens County, Georgia, USA
* runs with birdseed *

Re: Dragging tabs in Google Chrome 97

[David Wright]

On Wed 05 Jan 2022 at 10:25:38 (-0500), Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 09:14:07AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > This morning, I did my normal apt-get update/upgrade, and this brought
> > in a new version of google-chrome-stable
> > 
> > ii  google-chrome-stable 97.0.4692.71-1 amd64The web browser from 
> > Google
> > 
> > After restarting in the new version of Chrome, I am unable to move
> > tabs around within a window.  Any attempt to drag a tab to the left or
> > the right immediately causes the creation of a new window, with the
> > tab that I was trying to move inside the new window.
> 
> I've discovered another symptom, and I'm assuming it's related.
> 
> One of the games that I play in Chrome is an incremental called Evolve
> .  This game uses Javascript
> heavily, and allows dragging and dropping various things within the
> game, in order to rearrange work queues and so forth.
> 
> As of this morning's update, dragging and dropping items in this game
> doesn't work either.  The dragging part appears to work correctly, as
> far as I can tell -- there is visual feedback that a thing is being
> moved as I drag with the mouse.  But when I release the button to "drop"
> the thing, it simply goes back to its original position.  No rearranging
> occurs.

Not to say it's relevant or irrelevant, but that's the behaviour of
dragging any image in FF: let go and it puts it back where it was.
What I don't know is whether an item that's drag-AND-droppable has
to be marked in some way, which could be missing; or whether it's
just the dropping mechanism that's broken.

Cheers,
David.

Re: Single broken package blocks whole package management

[David Wright]

On Wed 05 Jan 2022 at 14:32:57 (+0100), Urs Thuermann wrote:
> After an dist-upgrade from Raspian 8 (jessie) to 9.13 (stretch)
> hundreds of packages still need to be upgraded and aptitude reports
> numerous conflicts.
> 
> I first wanted to upgrade everything which doesn't causes any
> conflicts, which fails because of problems in wolfram-engine:
> 
> root@uranus:~# aptitude safe-upgrade --no-new-installs -RZ
> Resolving dependencies...
> open: 2242; closed: 1906; defer: 121; conflict: 311
> The following packages will be upgraded:
>   acl <+36.9 kB>  adduser <-222 kB>  alacarte <-20.5 kB>  
>   alsa-utils <+198 kB>  aspell-en <+95.2 kB>  avahi-daemon <+53.2 kB>  
>   [...]
>   xserver-common <+53.2 kB>  xserver-xorg <+1024 B>  
>   xserver-xorg-input-all <+1024 B>  xterm <+163 kB>  
> The following partially installed packages will be configured:
>   debconf-utils  
> The following packages are RECOMMENDED but will NOT be installed:
>   at-spi2-core  bsd-mailx  cinnamon  dunst  exfat-utils  fonts-piboto  
>   gdisk  gnome-accessibility-themes  gnome-flashback  gnome-screenshot
>   [...]
>   xfce4-notifyd  xfonts-base  xserver-xorg-input-wacom  
>   xserver-xorg-legacy  
> 663 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 344 not 
> upgraded.
> Need to get 0 B/283 MB of archives. After unpacking 89.8 MB will be used.
> Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?] 
> Reading changelogs... Done   
> Unescaped left brace in regex is deprecated, passed through in regex; 
> marked by <-- HERE in m/^(.*?)(\\)?\${ <-- HERE ([^{}]+)}(.*)$/ at 
> /usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Question.pm line 72.
> Unescaped left brace in regex is deprecated, passed through in regex; 
> marked by <-- HERE in m/\${ <-- HERE ([^}]+)}/ at 
> /usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Config.pm line 30.
> Extracting templates from packages: 100%
> Preconfiguring packages ...
> dpkg: unrecoverable fatal error, aborting:
>  files list file for package 'wolfram-engine' contains empty filename
> E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (2)
> Failed to perform requested operation on package.  Trying to recover:
> 
> root@uranus:~#

Debian buster here.

$ ls -l /usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Question.pm
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 5867 Oct  1 04:39 /usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Question.pm
$ 

$ grep -A1 -B1 '()' /usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Question.pm
my $escape;
while ($rest =~ m/^(.*?)(\\)?\$\{([^{}]+)\}(.*)$/sg) {
$result.=$1;  # copy anything before the variable
$ 

So edit /usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Question.pm and insert a \ before
the {, just as the message indicates.

> I tried to remove packages wolfram-engine and wolframscript, also
> tried to remove debconf-utils, but everything fails with the same
> error message:
> 
> root@uranus:~# dpkg --force-all -P wolfram-engine 
> dpkg: unrecoverable fatal error, aborting:
>  files list file for package 'wolfram-engine' contains empty filename
> 
> Also, upgrading a single package that's completely unrelated, is not
> possible:
> 
> root@uranus:~# aptitude install acl
> The following packages will be upgraded: 
>   acl libacl1 
> The following partially installed packages will be configured:
>   debconf-utils{b} 
> 2 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1005 not upgraded.
> Need to get 0 B/80.7 kB of archives. After unpacking 49.2 kB will be used.
> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
>  debconf-utils : Depends: debconf (= 1.5.61) but 1.5.56+deb8u1 is 
> installed and it is kept back.
> The following actions will resolve these dependencies:
> 
>  Remove the following packages:
> 1) debconf-utils   
> 
> 
> 
> Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?] 
> The following packages will be REMOVED:
>   debconf-utils{a} 
> The following packages will be upgraded:
>   acl libacl1 
> 2 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 1 to remove and 1005 not upgraded.
> Need to get 0 B/80.7 kB of archives. After unpacking 58.4 kB will be 
> freed.
> Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?] 
> Reading changelogs... Done   
> Unescaped left brace in regex is deprecated, passed through in regex; 
> marked by <-- HERE in m/^(.*?)(\\)?\${ <-- HERE ([^{}]+)}(.*)$/ at 
> /usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Question.pm line 72.
> Unescaped left brace in regex is deprecated, passed through in regex; 
> marked by <-- HERE in m/\${ <-- HERE ([^}]+)}/ at 
> /usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Config.pm line 30.
> dpkg: unrecoverable fatal error, aborting:
>  files list file for package 'wolfram-engine' contains empty filename
> E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (2)
> Failed to perform requested operation on package.  Trying to recover:
> 
> root@uranus:~#
> 
> What else can I do to get the package management 

Re: Single broken package blocks whole package management

[Urs Thuermann]

Richard Hector  writes:

> Firstly, the standard response is that Raspbian is not Debian :-)
> There are differences which might be related to your problem.

Yes, of course.  I know.  But my question was not about the Raspbian
specific packages but on apt, dpkg, aptitude & co.  I assume, these
work mostly (or exactly) like in Debian.

> > I first wanted to upgrade everything which doesn't causes any
> > conflicts, which fails because of problems in wolfram-engine:
> 
> wolfram-engine appears not to be a debian package, for starters.
> 
> [...]
> 
> Ah. So perhaps a bug in that package. Or it's corrupted.
> 
> If you look at /var/lib/dpkg/info/wolfram-engine.list does it have an
> empty line in it? What happens if you edit that out?

OK, thanks for that hint.  This file indeed not only contained a blank
line, but it seems to be completely corrupted.  Roughly 5-10% of all
bytes in random positions are replaced with random (some ASCII, some
non-ASCII) values, making *lots* corrupted path names, which I can
still recognize/guess, but corrupted.  And one line had its last
character replaced by a new-line, thus making a blank line.  A quick
check

# cd /var/lib/dpkg/info; file *.list | grep -v ASCII
ca-certificates.list:   UTF-8 Unicode text
libmodule-build-perl.list:  empty
python-apt-common.list: data
wolfram-engine.list:data

showed another corrupted file.  python-apt-common.list has the same
random errors.  Just curious, I wanted to know, whether all other
files contain valid and existing path names:

# for f in *list; do echo $f; cat $f | tr '\n' '\0' | 
  xargs -0 ls -d >/dev/null ; done 2>&1 | less

Many package list files contain path names which seem valid but are
non-existent in the file system.  Is that normal?  On another
Debian stretch/amd64 system with 1868 packages installed I got only 3
packages each containing only 1 non-existent path name.

> I'd try deleting any blank lines from that file, and trying again.

Yes, I will try that.  Just to learn if it will fix things.  I expect
many errors because of the many broken path names which cannot be
removed.

However, since this system looks somewhat suspicious already and I
wanted to go to buster (or maybe bullseye) anyway, I will save /home
and relevant stuff from /var and then reinstall from scratch.  After
testing the SD card.  Seems to be easier.

> Or maybe apt-get install --reinstall wolfram-engine

It all leads to the same error message as above.
I don't need Wolfram anyway, it's been installed by default.

> Or ask on a Raspbian list :-)

Hm, probably I wasn't clear enough.  My question was not about
Raspbian or the wolfram package, but about dpkg and friends.  Isn't
there a better way to remove packages if the .list file corrupted?
And isn't there a way to temporarily ignore such errors and install or
upgrade other packages despite such an error?  Even dpkg --force-all
didn't help so I couldn't do aynthing.  I found it surpring that a
single broken package leaves you in a state where you're stuck and
cannot go out, easily.

> https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/425355/x11-common-contains-empty-filename

Looks very similar to my problem.

urs

Re: Dragging tabs in Google Chrome 97

[Greg Wooledge]

On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 09:14:07AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> This morning, I did my normal apt-get update/upgrade, and this brought
> in a new version of google-chrome-stable
> 
> ii  google-chrome-stable 97.0.4692.71-1 amd64The web browser from 
> Google
> 
> After restarting in the new version of Chrome, I am unable to move
> tabs around within a window.  Any attempt to drag a tab to the left or
> the right immediately causes the creation of a new window, with the
> tab that I was trying to move inside the new window.

I've discovered another symptom, and I'm assuming it's related.

One of the games that I play in Chrome is an incremental called Evolve
.  This game uses Javascript
heavily, and allows dragging and dropping various things within the
game, in order to rearrange work queues and so forth.

As of this morning's update, dragging and dropping items in this game
doesn't work either.  The dragging part appears to work correctly, as
far as I can tell -- there is visual feedback that a thing is being
moved as I drag with the mouse.  But when I release the button to "drop"
the thing, it simply goes back to its original position.  No rearranging
occurs.

Welke firefox-esr

[Geert Stappers]

Previous-Subject: Re: https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/rustc-mozilla
In-Reply-To: <87sfu2uve7@munus.decebal.nl>

On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 03:09:20PM +0100, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
> Paul van der Vlis  writes:
> 
> > Er is overigens nog steeds geen nieuwe firefox-esr voor Debian10,
> > gelukkig wel voor Debian9 en Debian11.
> 
> Weet je dat zeker? Ik heb net zowel 'apt update' als 'apt-get update'
> gedaan, maar kreeg geen nieuwe firefox-esr.
> 
> 
> Maar het zou ook aan mijn systeem kunnen liggen, want ik heb al een
> poosje geen updates meer gehad. Waar zou ik naar moeten kijken?
> Uitvoer van 'apt update':
> Hit:1 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports InRelease
> Hit:2 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye InRelease  
>   
> Hit:3 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates InRelease  
>   
> . 

Welke firefox-esr heb je nu? (dpkg -l firefox-esr)



Groeten
Geert Stappers
-- 
Silence is hard to parse

Re: Single broken package blocks whole package management

[Andrew M.A. Cater]

On Thu, Jan 06, 2022 at 03:20:38AM +1300, Richard Hector wrote:
> On 6/01/22 02:32, Urs Thuermann wrote:
> > After an dist-upgrade from Raspian 8 (jessie) to 9.13 (stretch)
> > hundreds of packages still need to be upgraded and aptitude reports
> > numerous conflicts.
> 
> Firstly, the standard response is that Raspbian is not Debian :-) There are
> differences which might be related to your problem.
> 

Raspbian _isn't_ Debian. Wolfram-engine is a third party (commercial) app -
Wolfram Mathematica which the Raspberry Pi foundation licences with a 
special educational arrangement.

You might be able to force a reinstall of wolfram-engine to produce
something consistent to then remove but this is probably wasted
effort.


Rather than trying to update from 8 to 9, unless you have significant
data invested, I would suggest simply downloading a copy of the latest
release of Raspberry Pi OS based on Debian 11.

Although I can guarantee that Debian should be upgradable between major
releases, I can't be sure for other Debian derivatives.

As ever, for Debian: https://wiki.debian.org/DontBreakDebian

Debian installers which will install something closer to vanilla Debian
are available - but don't include Wolfram's software. They're unofficial
in that they're dependnet on non-free software to install. See 
https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/unofficial/raspi/

Quickest solution: install Raspberry Pi OS latest version - available
from https://www.raspberrypi.com/software/

With every good wish, as ever,

Andy Cater


> > I first wanted to upgrade everything which doesn't causes any
> > conflicts, which fails because of problems in wolfram-engine:
> 
> wolfram-engine appears not to be a debian package, for starters.
> 
> [snip]
> 
> >  Unescaped left brace in regex is deprecated, passed through in regex; 
> > marked by <-- HERE in m/^(.*?)(\\)?\${ <-- HERE ([^{}]+)}(.*)$/ at 
> > /usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Question.pm line 72.
> >  Unescaped left brace in regex is deprecated, passed through in regex; 
> > marked by <-- HERE in m/\${ <-- HERE ([^}]+)}/ at 
> > /usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Config.pm line 30.
> 
> Looks bad, but deprecation isn't an error.
> 
> [snip]
> 
> >  dpkg: unrecoverable fatal error, aborting:
> >   files list file for package 'wolfram-engine' contains empty filename
> >  E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (2)
> >  Failed to perform requested operation on package.  Trying to recover:
> 
> Ah. So perhaps a bug in that package. Or it's corrupted.
> 
> If you look at /var/lib/dpkg/info/wolfram-engine.list does it have an empty
> line in it? What happens if you edit that out?
> 
> > 
> >  root@uranus:~#
> > 
> > I tried to remove packages wolfram-engine and wolframscript, also
> > tried to remove debconf-utils, but everything fails with the same
> > error message:
> > 
> >  root@uranus:~# dpkg --force-all -P wolfram-engine
> >  dpkg: unrecoverable fatal error, aborting:
> >   files list file for package 'wolfram-engine' contains empty filename
> 
> Same thing
> 
> > 
> > Also, upgrading a single package that's completely unrelated, is not
> > possible:
> > 
> >  root@uranus:~# aptitude install acl
> >  The following packages will be upgraded:
> >acl libacl1
> >  The following partially installed packages will be configured:
> >debconf-utils{b}
> >  2 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1005 not 
> > upgraded.
> >  Need to get 0 B/80.7 kB of archives. After unpacking 49.2 kB will be 
> > used.
> >  The following packages have unmet dependencies:
> >   debconf-utils : Depends: debconf (= 1.5.61) but 1.5.56+deb8u1 is 
> > installed and it is kept back.
> >  The following actions will resolve these dependencies:
> > 
> >   Remove the following packages:
> >  1) debconf-utils
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?]
> >  The following packages will be REMOVED:
> >debconf-utils{a}
> >  The following packages will be upgraded:
> >acl libacl1
> >  2 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 1 to remove and 1005 not 
> > upgraded.
> >  Need to get 0 B/80.7 kB of archives. After unpacking 58.4 kB will be 
> > freed.
> >  Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]
> >  Reading changelogs... Done
> >  Unescaped left brace in regex is deprecated, passed through in regex; 
> > marked by <-- HERE in m/^(.*?)(\\)?\${ <-- HERE ([^{}]+)}(.*)$/ at 
> > /usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Question.pm line 72.
> >  Unescaped left brace in regex is deprecated, passed through in regex; 
> > marked by <-- HERE in m/\${ <-- HERE ([^}]+)}/ at 
> > /usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Config.pm line 30.
> >  dpkg: unrecoverable fatal error, aborting:
> >   files list file for package 'wolfram-engine' contains empty filename
> >  E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (2)
> >  Failed to perform requested operation on package.  Trying to 

Re: Thunderbird not allowing local accounts

[Paul M. Foster]

On 1/5/22 09:05, Richard Hector wrote:

On 6/01/22 02:35, Paul M. Foster wrote:

Folks:

I just restarted my machine, and am using Thunderbird 91.4.1 (the 
latest) 64 bit on Debian 11. I didn't reinstall Thunderbird or upgrade 
it. Before I restarted the machine, I had a Thunderbird email account 
for local emails, which grabbed email from my /var/mail/paulf folder. 
Now that account doesn't show up in Thunderbird, and I'm unable to 
create an account like that (one which grabs mail from a local 
folder). The dialogs which used to be there allowing you to create a 
localhost mbox account are gone. I've verified the (complicated) 
procedure for doing this on the Internet, and the dialogs shown are no 
longer in Thunderbird. I am unable to create a localhost email account 
in Thunderbird.


Any help? Did Thunderbird make some change I don't know about?

Paul



Looks like it :-(

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=993526
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1625741

Richard



Thanks for the info. Mozilla Foundation is seriously annoying me lately.

Can anyone recommend another MUA which uses mbox format and is 
relatively easy to configure?


Paul

Re: Single broken package blocks whole package management

[Richard Hector]

On 6/01/22 02:32, Urs Thuermann wrote:

After an dist-upgrade from Raspian 8 (jessie) to 9.13 (stretch)
hundreds of packages still need to be upgraded and aptitude reports
numerous conflicts.


Firstly, the standard response is that Raspbian is not Debian :-) There 
are differences which might be related to your problem.



I first wanted to upgrade everything which doesn't causes any
conflicts, which fails because of problems in wolfram-engine:


wolfram-engine appears not to be a debian package, for starters.

[snip]


 Unescaped left brace in regex is deprecated, passed through in regex; marked by 
<-- HERE in m/^(.*?)(\\)?\${ <-- HERE ([^{}]+)}(.*)$/ at 
/usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Question.pm line 72.
 Unescaped left brace in regex is deprecated, passed through in regex; marked by 
<-- HERE in m/\${ <-- HERE ([^}]+)}/ at /usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Config.pm line 
30.


Looks bad, but deprecation isn't an error.

[snip]


 dpkg: unrecoverable fatal error, aborting:
  files list file for package 'wolfram-engine' contains empty filename
 E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (2)
 Failed to perform requested operation on package.  Trying to recover:


Ah. So perhaps a bug in that package. Or it's corrupted.

If you look at /var/lib/dpkg/info/wolfram-engine.list does it have an 
empty line in it? What happens if you edit that out?




 root@uranus:~#

I tried to remove packages wolfram-engine and wolframscript, also
tried to remove debconf-utils, but everything fails with the same
error message:

 root@uranus:~# dpkg --force-all -P wolfram-engine
 dpkg: unrecoverable fatal error, aborting:
  files list file for package 'wolfram-engine' contains empty filename


Same thing



Also, upgrading a single package that's completely unrelated, is not
possible:

 root@uranus:~# aptitude install acl
 The following packages will be upgraded:
   acl libacl1
 The following partially installed packages will be configured:
   debconf-utils{b}
 2 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1005 not upgraded.
 Need to get 0 B/80.7 kB of archives. After unpacking 49.2 kB will be used.
 The following packages have unmet dependencies:
  debconf-utils : Depends: debconf (= 1.5.61) but 1.5.56+deb8u1 is 
installed and it is kept back.
 The following actions will resolve these dependencies:

  Remove the following packages:
 1) debconf-utils



 Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?]
 The following packages will be REMOVED:
   debconf-utils{a}
 The following packages will be upgraded:
   acl libacl1
 2 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 1 to remove and 1005 not upgraded.
 Need to get 0 B/80.7 kB of archives. After unpacking 58.4 kB will be freed.
 Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]
 Reading changelogs... Done
 Unescaped left brace in regex is deprecated, passed through in regex; marked by 
<-- HERE in m/^(.*?)(\\)?\${ <-- HERE ([^{}]+)}(.*)$/ at 
/usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Question.pm line 72.
 Unescaped left brace in regex is deprecated, passed through in regex; marked by 
<-- HERE in m/\${ <-- HERE ([^}]+)}/ at /usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Config.pm line 
30.
 dpkg: unrecoverable fatal error, aborting:
  files list file for package 'wolfram-engine' contains empty filename
 E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (2)
 Failed to perform requested operation on package.  Trying to recover:


Still comes back to the same thing.


 root@uranus:~#
 
What else can I do to get the package management working again?


I'd try deleting any blank lines from that file, and trying again.

Or maybe apt-get install --reinstall wolfram-engine

Or ask on a Raspbian list :-)

A related question here:

https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/425355/x11-common-contains-empty-filename

Cheers,
Richard

Dragging tabs in Google Chrome 97

[Greg Wooledge]

This morning, I did my normal apt-get update/upgrade, and this brought
in a new version of google-chrome-stable

ii  google-chrome-stable 97.0.4692.71-1 amd64The web browser from Google

After restarting in the new version of Chrome, I am unable to move
tabs around within a window.  Any attempt to drag a tab to the left or
the right immediately causes the creation of a new window, with the
tab that I was trying to move inside the new window.

>From there, if I right-click the offending tab inside the new window,
there's an option to "Move tab to a new window".  I can use this to
send the tab back to its original window -- but now it's on the far
right.

I googled (ironically) the problem, and of course because Chrome 97 is
so new, there are no useful pages in the search results yet.  The nearest
I found were some older reports of similar issues.

One thread reported this happening under Xwayland.  I am not running
Wayland.  Pure X11.

Another thread reported this happening if a hardware device (such as a
keyboard, microphone, or audio headset) was sending events.  I ran xev
to verify that there were no incoming events.  I also tried unplugging
and re-plugging my USB keyboard.  I finally tried unplugging my USB
microphone/camera.  Neither of those helped.

(While re-plugging the USB mic/camera, I accidentally pressed the power
button and turned my computer off.  I'm pleased to report that the GRUB
issue I had last time I booted did not occur this time -- the keyboard
worked in GRUB, and I was able to reboot without a 2 minute wait.  Sadly,
the reboot did not fix the Chrome tab dragging issue.)

I know this isn't the *best* place to ask for help with proprietary
browsers, but this is a pretty popular one, so there's a chance.  Has
anyone else encountered this problem?  More importantly, does anyone
know how to *fix* it?

Being unable to rearrange tabs in a sane manner is EXTREMELY irritating.

Re: Thunderbird not allowing local accounts

[Richard Hector]

On 6/01/22 02:35, Paul M. Foster wrote:

Folks:

I just restarted my machine, and am using Thunderbird 91.4.1 (the 
latest) 64 bit on Debian 11. I didn't reinstall Thunderbird or upgrade 
it. Before I restarted the machine, I had a Thunderbird email account 
for local emails, which grabbed email from my /var/mail/paulf folder. 
Now that account doesn't show up in Thunderbird, and I'm unable to 
create an account like that (one which grabs mail from a local folder). 
The dialogs which used to be there allowing you to create a localhost 
mbox account are gone. I've verified the (complicated) procedure for 
doing this on the Internet, and the dialogs shown are no longer in 
Thunderbird. I am unable to create a localhost email account in 
Thunderbird.


Any help? Did Thunderbird make some change I don't know about?

Paul



Looks like it :-(

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=993526
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1625741

Richard

Re: https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/rustc-mozilla

[Cecil Westerhof]

Paul van der Vlis  writes:

> Er is overigens nog steeds geen nieuwe firefox-esr voor Debian10,
> gelukkig wel voor Debian9 en Debian11.

Weet je dat zeker? Ik heb net zowel 'apt update' als 'apt-get update'
gedaan, maar kreeg geen nieuwe firefox-esr.


Maar het zou ook aan mijn systeem kunnen liggen, want ik heb al een
poosje geen updates meer gehad. Waar zou ik naar moeten kijken?
Uitvoer van 'apt update':
Hit:1 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports InRelease
Hit:2 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye InRelease

Hit:3 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates InRelease

Hit:4 http://download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/debian buster InRelease 
  
Get:5 https://download.docker.com/linux/debian bullseye InRelease [43.3 kB]
Fetched 43.3 kB in 1s (43.5 kB/s)   
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree... Done
Reading state information... Done
All packages are up to date.

Ik heb mijn sources.list aangepast aan wat hier staat:
https://gist.github.com/ishad0w/7665cde882aa7dc3eec99613802e61e4

Maar ook dan krijg ik geen updates aangeboden:
Get:1 http://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security 
InRelease [44.1 kB]
Hit:2 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye InRelease 
Hit:3 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates InRelease
Hit:4 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports InRelease
Get:5 http://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security/main 
Sources [76.5 kB]
Get:6 http://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security/main 
amd64 Packages [102 kB]
Get:7 http://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security/main 
Translation-en [65.2 kB]
Fetched 288 kB in 1s (283 kB/s)  
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree... Done
Reading state information... Done
All packages are up to date.

-- 
Cecil Westerhof
Senior Software Engineer
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/cecilwesterhof

Re: [SOLVED] Re: Firefox: Warning: Potential Security Risk Ahead for the USPS.com

[Celejar]

On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 06:10:48 +0100
 wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 04, 2022 at 04:05:11PM -0500, Celejar wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > One way "to combine DoH with resolving 14,000 addresses to 127.0.0.1"
> > is by using Pi-hole. Some people have *millions* of domains blacklisted
> > in Pi-hole:
> 
> Pi-hole won't help unles it also does HTTPS proxying (that means it
> would have to play MITM). As far as I know it "just" does conventional
> DNS proxying (which is a great thing to do, mind you).

Why won't it help? What won't it help with? If you mean that the
queries won't be secure during the leg between the client and
the Pi-hole, we're talking about running Pi-hole within one's trusted
network (or connecting to it over a VPN, etc.)
> 
> But hey, full HTTP(S) proxying would be a great thing to do. Still,
> you'd have to munge your browser's trusted certs for that trick to work.

Celejar

Single broken package blocks whole package management

[Urs Thuermann]

After an dist-upgrade from Raspian 8 (jessie) to 9.13 (stretch)
hundreds of packages still need to be upgraded and aptitude reports
numerous conflicts.

I first wanted to upgrade everything which doesn't causes any
conflicts, which fails because of problems in wolfram-engine:

root@uranus:~# aptitude safe-upgrade --no-new-installs -RZ
Resolving dependencies...
open: 2242; closed: 1906; defer: 121; conflict: 311
The following packages will be upgraded:
  acl <+36.9 kB>  adduser <-222 kB>  alacarte <-20.5 kB>  
  alsa-utils <+198 kB>  aspell-en <+95.2 kB>  avahi-daemon <+53.2 kB>  
  [...]
  xserver-common <+53.2 kB>  xserver-xorg <+1024 B>  
  xserver-xorg-input-all <+1024 B>  xterm <+163 kB>  
The following partially installed packages will be configured:
  debconf-utils  
The following packages are RECOMMENDED but will NOT be installed:
  at-spi2-core  bsd-mailx  cinnamon  dunst  exfat-utils  fonts-piboto  
  gdisk  gnome-accessibility-themes  gnome-flashback  gnome-screenshot
  [...]
  xfce4-notifyd  xfonts-base  xserver-xorg-input-wacom  
  xserver-xorg-legacy  
663 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 344 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B/283 MB of archives. After unpacking 89.8 MB will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?] 
Reading changelogs... Done   
Unescaped left brace in regex is deprecated, passed through in regex; 
marked by <-- HERE in m/^(.*?)(\\)?\${ <-- HERE ([^{}]+)}(.*)$/ at 
/usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Question.pm line 72.
Unescaped left brace in regex is deprecated, passed through in regex; 
marked by <-- HERE in m/\${ <-- HERE ([^}]+)}/ at 
/usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Config.pm line 30.
Extracting templates from packages: 100%
Preconfiguring packages ...
dpkg: unrecoverable fatal error, aborting:
 files list file for package 'wolfram-engine' contains empty filename
E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (2)
Failed to perform requested operation on package.  Trying to recover:

root@uranus:~#

I tried to remove packages wolfram-engine and wolframscript, also
tried to remove debconf-utils, but everything fails with the same
error message:

root@uranus:~# dpkg --force-all -P wolfram-engine 
dpkg: unrecoverable fatal error, aborting:
 files list file for package 'wolfram-engine' contains empty filename

Also, upgrading a single package that's completely unrelated, is not
possible:

root@uranus:~# aptitude install acl
The following packages will be upgraded: 
  acl libacl1 
The following partially installed packages will be configured:
  debconf-utils{b} 
2 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1005 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B/80.7 kB of archives. After unpacking 49.2 kB will be used.
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
 debconf-utils : Depends: debconf (= 1.5.61) but 1.5.56+deb8u1 is installed 
and it is kept back.
The following actions will resolve these dependencies:

 Remove the following packages:
1) debconf-utils   



Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?] 
The following packages will be REMOVED:
  debconf-utils{a} 
The following packages will be upgraded:
  acl libacl1 
2 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 1 to remove and 1005 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B/80.7 kB of archives. After unpacking 58.4 kB will be freed.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?] 
Reading changelogs... Done   
Unescaped left brace in regex is deprecated, passed through in regex; 
marked by <-- HERE in m/^(.*?)(\\)?\${ <-- HERE ([^{}]+)}(.*)$/ at 
/usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Question.pm line 72.
Unescaped left brace in regex is deprecated, passed through in regex; 
marked by <-- HERE in m/\${ <-- HERE ([^}]+)}/ at 
/usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Config.pm line 30.
dpkg: unrecoverable fatal error, aborting:
 files list file for package 'wolfram-engine' contains empty filename
E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (2)
Failed to perform requested operation on package.  Trying to recover:

root@uranus:~#

What else can I do to get the package management working again?

urs

Thunderbird not allowing local accounts

[Paul M. Foster]

Folks:

I just restarted my machine, and am using Thunderbird 91.4.1 (the 
latest) 64 bit on Debian 11. I didn't reinstall Thunderbird or upgrade 
it. Before I restarted the machine, I had a Thunderbird email account 
for local emails, which grabbed email from my /var/mail/paulf folder. 
Now that account doesn't show up in Thunderbird, and I'm unable to 
create an account like that (one which grabs mail from a local folder). 
The dialogs which used to be there allowing you to create a localhost 
mbox account are gone. I've verified the (complicated) procedure for 
doing this on the Internet, and the dialogs shown are no longer in 
Thunderbird. I am unable to create a localhost email account in Thunderbird.


Any help? Did Thunderbird make some change I don't know about?

Paul

Re: [SOLVED] Re: Firefox: Warning: Potential Security Risk Ahead for the USPS.com

[Dan Ritter]

to...@tuxteam.de wrote: 
> On Tue, Jan 04, 2022 at 04:09:42PM -0500, Dan Ritter wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > Here's what I do:
> > 
> > My local DNS resolver offers DNS, DNS over TLS, and DNS over
> > HTTPS.
> > 
> > I supply a use-application-dns.net zone that returns NXDOMAIN.
> > That tells browsers to not use DoH.
> 
> Oh, is it possible to tell the browsers which host to ask to resolve DoH
> requests? That would be... nice :)

Not precisely which host. A compliant DoH client (FF, Chrome) is supposed to
start by asking local DNS for a record from
use-application-dns.net, which Mozilla runs. If your DNS server has
use-application-dns.net and insists on returning NXDOMAIN, then
the client should fall back to using whatever DNS the operating
system supplies.

In Bullseye, unbound has support for both DNS-over-TLS and
DNS-over-HTTPS -- the latter is new.

> > I build an adblocker zone [...] that always answers with a 204 [...]
> 
> nice

Pick an IP in your local net - let's say, 10.0.0.254. Use that
as your DNS response instead of 127.0.0.1. This will work just
fine in /etc/hosts.

Make sure you have a machine listening to 10.0.0.254, and set up
a web server to answer regardless of name. 

For nginx:

server {
listen 10.0.0.254:80;
server_name _;

root /var/www/blank;
index blank.png;

rewrite .+?(png|gif|jpe?g)$ /blankimg last;
rewrite ^(.*)$ / last;

location / {
  return 204;
}

location /blankimg {
empty_gif; # See 
http://nginx.org/en/docs/http/ngx_http_empty_gif_module.html
}
}

So if the page asks for an image, I supply a 1x1 transparent dot.
If it asks for anything else, 204, which is not an error.


-dsr-

Re: https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/rustc-mozilla

[Paul van der Vlis]

Hoi Geert en anderen,

Op 04-01-2022 om 23:21 schreef Geert Stappers:


Beste Wensen,


Op https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/rustc-mozilla
staat o.a.   package is gone
   This package is not in any development repository. This probably
   means that the package has been removed (or has been renamed). Thus
   the information here is of little interest ... the package is going
   to disappear unless someone takes it over and reintroduces it.

En als je dan naar upload history onder kopje "news" kijkt:
 [2021-12-28] Accepted rustc-mozilla 1.51.0+dfsg1-1~deb10u2 (all amd64 source) 
into oldstable-proposed-updates->oldstable-new, oldstable-proposed-updates 
(Debian FTP Masters) (signed by: Roberto C. Sanchez)
 [2021-12-28] Accepted rustc-mozilla 1.51.0+dfsg1-1~deb9u2 (source) into 
oldoldstable (Roberto C. Sánchez) (signed by: Roberto C. Sanchez)
 [2021-12-16] Accepted rustc-mozilla 1.51.0+dfsg1-1~deb9u1 (all amd64 
source) into oldoldstable, oldoldstable (Debian FTP Masters) (signed by: 
Roberto C. Sanchez)
 [2021-12-13] Accepted rustc-mozilla 1.51.0+dfsg1-1~deb10u1 (all amd64 source) 
into oldstable-proposed-updates->oldstable-new, oldstable-proposed-updates 
(Debian FTP Masters) (signed by: Roberto C. Sanchez)
 [2021-12-12] Accepted rustc-mozilla 1.51.0+dfsg1-1~deb11u1 (all amd64 source) 
into proposed-updates->stable-new, proposed-updates (Debian FTP Masters) 
(signed by: Roberto C. Sanchez)

Dat zie je pas hoe bijzonder het package rustc-mozilla is.
Een spiksplinter nieuwe rustc  is geplaatst in
  stable,
  oldstable  en zelfs
  oldoldstable

Met de verse rust compiler kan nu verse firefox
gebouwd worden voor wat al lang uitgebracht is.


Ik vind dat stoer.


Het is zeker stoer, maar het hele proces was voor mij heel erg 
ondoorzichtig. Ik heb het proberen te volgen, maar dat ging niet.


Verder heb ik de indruk dat wat er allemaal nodig was, niet erg van te 
voren is voorzien. Waardoor het allemaal eigenlijk te lang heeft 
geduurd. De security was niet echt in orde.


Er is overigens nog steeds geen nieuwe firefox-esr voor Debian10, 
gelukkig wel voor Debian9 en Debian11.


In Thunderbird upstream zit iets vervelends, waardoor de locale niet 
wordt gebruikt voor GUI en spelling. Het moet handmatig worden gewijzigd 
na de security update. Ik denk dat er geen tijd voor geweest is hier een 
oplossing voor te vinden.


Als we het hebben over de Mozilla software wordt Debian stable (en ook 
de oudere versies) steeds meer een rolling release distro, terwijl dat 
er allemaal niet echt op is ontworpen.


Ook de beste wensen!

Groet,
Paul




--
Paul van der Vlis Linux systeembeheer Groningen
https://vandervlis.nl/

Re: https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/rustc-mozilla

[Cecil Westerhof]

Geert Stappers  writes:

> Met de verse rust compiler kan nu verse firefox
> gebouwd worden voor wat al lang uitgebracht is.

Dat zou mooi zijn, want ik kan de nieuwe esr versie heel goed
gebruiken.

-- 
Cecil Westerhof
Senior Software Engineer
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/cecilwesterhof

Re: baja

[Camaleón]

El 2022-01-04 a las 22:23 -0300, federico montaldo escribió:
> Por favor saquenme de la lista

Era un hombre atrapado por la lista... ¡suéltame lista!

https://www.debian.org/MailingLists/unsubscribe> 

(en honor a una de las muchas joyas de Les Luthiers)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGpISZfYKO0

Saludos,

-- 
Camaleón 

Re: Problemas con archivos descargados, caracteres Ñ, y acentos

[Camaleón]

El 2022-01-04 a las 20:53 +, Ricardo Delgado escribió:

> Buenas tardes,
> 
> Estoy teniendo inconvenientes con mi XFCE, cuando descargo un archivo con Ñ o 
> acentos, los mismos se colocan con rombos (donde iria la letra con acento, o 
> con ñ)
> 
> este es mi LOCALE
> 
> LANG=es_AR.UTF-8
> LANGUAGE=
> LC_CTYPE="es_AR.UTF-8"
> LC_NUMERIC="es_AR.UTF-8"
> LC_TIME="es_AR.UTF-8"
> LC_COLLATE="es_AR.UTF-8"
> LC_MONETARY="es_AR.UTF-8"
> LC_MESSAGES="es_AR.UTF-8"
> LC_PAPER="es_AR.UTF-8"
> LC_NAME="es_AR.UTF-8"
> LC_ADDRESS="es_AR.UTF-8"
> LC_TELEPHONE="es_AR.UTF-8"
> LC_MEASUREMENT="es_AR.UTF-8"
> LC_IDENTIFICATION="es_AR.UTF-8"
> LC_ALL=
> 
> 
> Misma situacion con un disco en la nube (OWNCLOUD).
> 
> Cada vez que bajo un archivo, o coloco (desde otro equipo) un archivo con 
> acento o Ñ, me ocurre lo mismo.
> 
> Utilizo XCFE como entorno. No tengo problemas con el teclado. De hecho puedo 
> crear archivos con caracteres de acento u Ñ.
> 
> Alguna idea? un link donde buscar?

¿Todavía sigues con ese problema? :-?

Si no recuerdo mal, te dimos algunas sugerencias en otro hilo:

Acentos ñ en xfce
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user-spanish/2021/06/msg00011.html

Saludos,

-- 
Camaleón 

(deb-cat) Comunitat de PL a les administracions publiques

[Narcis Garcia]

Comento que, seguint l'article 17 del Reial Decret 4/2010 i l'article 
158 de la Llei 40/2015, está en funcionament aquest centre de publicació 
i intercanvi de programari lliure de i per a les administracions 
públiques i usuaris a Espanya:


https://administracionelectronica.gob.es/ctt/

Seria bo que més administracions (com l'autonòmica) apostessin per 
aquest model en comptes de subcontractar productes de dubtosa qualitat, 
escassa interoperativitat i nul·la transparència.


Haig d'assenyalar que hi ha paquets que s'enuncien compatibles amb 
Ubuntu en comptes de dir «Debian i derivats».

--

Narcis Garcia

__
I'm using this dedicated address because personal addresses aren't 
masked enough at this mail public archive. Public archive administrator 
should fix this against automated addresses collectors.