Re: [ubuntu-uk] Home/Small Business Server
Sorry, this is turning into a big rant about web based admin and having a gui on a small office/home server, but this is something that really really pushes the GAH buttons for me. begin more ranting On 26 September 2011 22:18, Bruno Girin brunogi...@gmail.com wrote: snip me ranting lots Well the main benefit of a web based UI is that you don't need all the desktop GUI libraries on the server, Yes, because HDD space is expensive these days! Lets have a look shall we, on the front page of ebuyer this, http://www.ebuyer.com/251310-extra-value-desktop-7873-1036 a cheap desktop with 1TB of disk space for less than £200. http://www.ebuyer.com/264274-wd-2tb-3-5-sata-iii-6gb-s-caviar-green-hard-drive-64mb-cache-wd20earx a 2TB HDD for less than £70. This really isn't an argument anymore. which means that the server stays a server and can be a fairly lean machine that doesn't burn CPU to paint a desktop (important for a small office where running a powerful server 24x7 can be prohibitively expensive and/or noisy). Ok, so to run XFCE the minimum spec is a 300MHz CPU and 192MB of RAM (http://wiki.xfce.org/minimum_requirements), again I can see that this adds a massive overhead on the currently underspecced bottom range computers since my eeePC could do that standing on it's head and still be coping ok. Since you could do that on this £60 quid motherboard (http://www.mini-itx.com/store/?c=60 first one at the top entitled Intel D425KT Fanless Atom Mini-ITX Board) and still have processing power left over, which is passivley cooled so has no need for noisy fans, I fail to see this as an argument in the environments this is aimed at. Most of the small offices I go to use Mac Minis for this kind of thing, you seem to be assuming you'd need a 1U rackmount server! And considering the size and complexity of GUI code these days, adding a GUI to a server is likely to increase the potential for bug several folds. because that's less complicated to debug than a full stack of Webserver/Interpreter (PHP/Python)/Database (mysql/postgres/couch/whatever)/backend services to prevent webserver requiring root privs/ and then the stack of other services you actually want. Of course, if something breaks in a GUI environment, I'd suspect the average person on the end of the phone wouldn't be too scared of being talked through fixing it rather than average bloke on the end of th phone where you say First go to the server and go to the console and do this - Easiest way to destroy sales ever. I hear what you say about web front-ends but balancing the pros and cons, I would still go for a web front-end, mainly to keep the server lightweight. This doesn't preclude a standard GUI front-end on client machines though. On todays hardware I really wouldn't. -Matt Daubney -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Home/Small Business Server
On Tue, 2011-09-27 at 08:28 +0100, Matthew Daubney wrote: [...] I'd suspect the average person on the end of the phone wouldn't be too scared of being talked through fixing it rather than average bloke on the end of th phone where you say First go to the server and go to the console and do this - Easiest way to destroy sales ever. Being able to connect over SSH and fix things is priceless :) I help my mom remotely (I'm in UK, she's in Spain), and every time I need to fix any GUI thing... it's a real nightmare. It's not only a bandwidth/latency issue, it's slower and less efficient. That said, I agree with you that GUI tools to deal with servers it's a good (optional) thing for people that want to get the power but they don't care about the associated knowledge. I think that's old news. Back in the day, Windows NT success vs the old Unices was the GUI; although remote admin is a real pain even today. I know people in a corporate environment that use RHEL basically because the GUI tools. The have the feel of Linux power, but at the same time it's just point click in a dialog window. Regards, Juan -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Home/Small Business Server
Well the main benefit of a web based UI is that you don't need all the desktop GUI libraries on the server, Yes, because HDD space is expensive these days! My understanding is is not about space. Extra libraries means extra attack vectors, extra things to update and to go wrong. Even Microsoft seems to have grasped this with Windows server 8 having the desktop as an optional extra. -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Home/Small Business Server
2011/9/27 Juan J. reid...@usebox.net: On Tue, 2011-09-27 at 08:28 +0100, Matthew Daubney wrote: [...] I'd suspect the average person on the end of the phone wouldn't be too scared of being talked through fixing it rather than average bloke on the end of th phone where you say First go to the server and go to the console and do this - Easiest way to destroy sales ever. Being able to connect over SSH and fix things is priceless :) Yesterday I spent nearly an hour explaining how to do port forwards to the head of IT at a company I deal with now and again so I could do this. That is hassle that is best avoided in all honesty. snip I know people in a corporate environment that use RHEL basically because the GUI tools. The have the feel of Linux power, but at the same time it's just point click in a dialog window. This is more or less exactley my point really. -Matt Daubney -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Home/Small Business Server
On 27 September 2011 08:47, Dan Attwood danattw...@gmail.com wrote: Well the main benefit of a web based UI is that you don't need all the desktop GUI libraries on the server, Yes, because HDD space is expensive these days! My understanding is is not about space. Extra libraries means extra attack vectors, extra things to update and to go wrong. Even Microsoft seems to have grasped this with Windows server 8 having the desktop as an optional extra. Again, you seem to be thinking this would go into places where people have a clue. The kind of target market for these kind of things is a small office with maybe 4-10 people or a slightly technical person at home with a couple of machines. They'd probably have someone else plug it into their network behind their ADSL router, and have someone else come and quickly explain how to connect machines to it and look after it. It's already behind a firewall (at the router) and it's very unlikely you'd have something like this directly connected to the net doing router like tasks. It may be issuing DHCP/DNS whatever to the network, but it would not route network traffic. If you where putting something in place where people where worried about that kind of thing you'd use the standard Ubuntu server, as they'd probably have an IT staff who could be trained. Not just the admin person who also gets the job of doing what the guy on the end of the phone says. Again, we're back to people thinking of a server as a big thing that runs lots and lots of services, has to be lightweight, fast and more secure than anything else ever when really, they're not! -Matt Daubney -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Home/Small Business Server
On Tue, 2011-09-27 at 08:48 +0100, Matthew Daubney wrote: 2011/9/27 Juan J. reidrac@: On Tue, 2011-09-27 at 08:28 +0100, Matthew Daubney wrote: [...] I'd suspect the average person on the end of the phone wouldn't be too scared of being talked through fixing it rather than average bloke on the end of th phone where you say First go to the server and go to the console and do this - Easiest way to destroy sales ever. Being able to connect over SSH and fix things is priceless :) Yesterday I spent nearly an hour explaining how to do port forwards to the head of IT at a company I deal with now and again so I could do this. That is hassle that is best avoided in all honesty. If the head of IT had problems to do a port forward, something's broken... and it's not Linux hehehe snip I know people in a corporate environment that use RHEL basically because the GUI tools. The have the feel of Linux power, but at the same time it's just point click in a dialog window. This is more or less exactley my point really. I couldn't stress enough the optional part in my previous message :) Actually the fact Ubuntu has a good reputation as Desktop OS plays against the distribution in the server arena. I've seen it a dozen of times, technical people discarding Ubuntu Server and using Debian instead without providing a good reason for that but it's Ubuntu Server and I don't like it for servers. We're obviously talking about different users here, but having desktop + GUI tools by default in Ubuntu Server would be a no-go for the technical userbase of Ubuntu. Regards, Juan -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Home/Small Business Server
2011/9/27 Juan J. reid...@usebox.net: snip We're obviously talking about different users here, but having desktop + GUI tools by default in Ubuntu Server would be a no-go for the technical userbase of Ubuntu. Good, again, we've just ignored the target audience and decided that it's actually aimed at current technical users of Ubuntu. Shall we start again? -Matt Daubney -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Home/Small Business Server
Juan J. wrote: Actually the fact Ubuntu has a good reputation as Desktop OS plays against the distribution in the server arena. I've seen it a dozen of times, technical people discarding Ubuntu Server and using Debian instead without providing a good reason for that but it's Ubuntu Server and I don't like it for servers. I've seen an increase in people asking for a 'Ubuntu server' rather than a 'Linux' one recently, though. And Ubuntu (now) has the advantage over Debian of coming with all the non-free firmware to make it actually work on hardware. I'm, recently, generally leaning towards Debian on the desktop where I don't get surprised every dist-upgrade and Ubuntu on the server where I get a kernel from the last few months. We're obviously talking about different users here, but having desktop + GUI tools by default in Ubuntu Server would be a no-go for the technical userbase of Ubuntu. As soon as you're using the phrase 'small business server' you're not talking of the technical userbase of Ubuntu. 'small business servers' are almost always in a position where the person administering them is not in any way qualified to do so. Moreso home servers. -- Avi -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] What should be done for 12.04
On 26/09/11 21:33, alan c wrote: On 26/09/11 14:45, Alan Bell wrote: 5) aggressive and well funded marketing campaign Yes yes yes please! I agree, as I suggested put some flyers etc in the repositories so users can download them, that way everyone has access to something, if 1 person prints 1 flyer and puts it up it helps, if everyone did that then it would really really have impact, don't forget to include the ubuntu website address on the flyer i have found flyers lacking some basic information such as this, if they are also easily editable with space to include local user groups or the Uk-ubuntu website it would help too. agressive does not mean expensive, what is the cost of 1 sheet of paper and some sticky tack. Paul -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] What should be done for 12.04
On 26/09/11 21:39, Andres wrote: - Mensaje original - On 26/09/11 13:48, Alan Pope wrote: Now we're perilously close to releasing 11.10 onto the world, it's been asked [0] what things the developers would like to see the focus on for the 12.04 (Long Term Support) release. sorry I am not a developer will shut my big mouth now!!! Neither am I, however end users can contribute ideas etc, as they are end users they come across problems or come up with ideas that developers can easily overlook. Paul -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Home/Small Business Server
On Tue, 2011-09-27 at 08:54 +0100, Matthew Daubney wrote: On 27 September 2011 08:47, Dan Attwood danattw...@gmail.com wrote: Well the main benefit of a web based UI is that you don't need all the desktop GUI libraries on the server, Yes, because HDD space is expensive these days! My understanding is is not about space. Extra libraries means extra attack vectors, extra things to update and to go wrong. Even Microsoft seems to have grasped this with Windows server 8 having the desktop as an optional extra. Again, you seem to be thinking this would go into places where people have a clue. The kind of target market for these kind of things is a small office with maybe 4-10 people or a slightly technical person at home with a couple of machines. They'd probably have someone else plug it into their network behind their ADSL router, and have someone else come and quickly explain how to connect machines to it and look after it. It's already behind a firewall (at the router) and it's very unlikely you'd have something like this directly connected to the net doing router like tasks. It may be issuing DHCP/DNS whatever to the network, but it would not route network traffic. If you where putting something in place where people where worried about that kind of thing you'd use the standard Ubuntu server, as they'd probably have an IT staff who could be trained. Not just the admin person who also gets the job of doing what the guy on the end of the phone says. Again, we're back to people thinking of a server as a big thing that runs lots and lots of services, has to be lightweight, fast and more secure than anything else ever when really, they're not! -Matt Daubney Matt I still think a full blown desktop is a faff. If you're not in the office and need to access the box forwarding x over a hotel network is not going to be fun in any shape or form. Hence my daft but functional ncursor suggestion. I've used the like of MC over a dodge network to swap around some files and that functions at a similar speed to if you have direct access to the box. I think in all honestly if you are running the box headless then the concept of a desktop becomes less useful. I do however agree the your average SOHO user is going to panic the minute he/she sees the terminal and nothing else. I think a welcome screen, byobu for general info, and a page of ncursor buttons that do the bulk of the essential duties would be more than enough. On the whole this is a box that the average SOHO user is going to want to setup once and then not tinker with again after that. They have wordpress/drupal/wiki style web pages that they will care about the most which is ermm web based admin and it's this that will have the most changes applied to it. For the SOHO user this is a box that sits in the corner and does what is required of it with the minimum of fuss or admin. -- Seek That Thy Might Know http://www.davmor2.co.uk signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
[ubuntu-uk] Diaspora hash
I just made an #ubuntu-uk Diaspora hash as there wasn't one - if you add the hash to posts, it should make it easier for people to find each other by searching on the hash? Paula -- Paula Graham Director | Fossbox http://www.fossbox.org.uk -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Diaspora hash
On 27/09/11 11:45, gazz wrote: I just made an #ubuntu-uk Diaspora hash as there wasn't one - if you add the hash to posts, it should make it easier for people to find each other by searching on the hash? Paula I gave up with diaspora ages ago, Paul -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Diaspora hash
I think they were too slow out of the blocks. A couple of days ago I offered my FB friends an invite, take up rate - zero. I think if Diaspora was used correctly, we could turn it into an ad hoc forum. Any test # post worked. Steve -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Home/Small Business Server
On 27 September 2011 11:38, Dave Morley davm...@davmor2.co.uk wrote: snip more of me ranting Matt I still think a full blown desktop is a faff. If you're not in the office and need to access the box forwarding x over a hotel network is not going to be fun in any shape or form. Simple question: How many average users do you expect would do this? snip ncurses stuff They have wordpress/drupal/wiki style web pages that they will care about the most which is ermm web based admin and it's this that will have the most changes applied to it. None of these things have been raised as things that would be installed on this box. I'd hesitate to do so simply because there are web services that provide these things for free that would do the security for them and not require any port forwarding setup on a router. I see a SOHO server as providing the following (in various fashions) * LDAP auth stuff * Maybe calendering * Computer control options on a workgroup/per user scale (you laugh, I'm asked for this regularly) * Maybe some NAS functions (very limited in scope, NAS type things should be dedicated boxes) * DHCP/DNS (again in a limited scope) Yes you could provide other things, but that is what I see as a base set of functionality based on what people have asked me for in the past. If you start saying Yes but you could provide this, that and the other too you end up trying to do many things at once, and will end up doing nothing particularly well. For the SOHO user this is a box that sits in the corner and does what is required of it with the minimum of fuss or admin. First you need to define what is required which was the original question, which has ended up in a debate about how best to let users configure the box! -Matt Daubney -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] What should be done for 12.04
-- Paula Graham Director | Fossbox http://www.fossbox.org.uk On Mon, 2011-09-26 at 14:45 +0100, Alan Bell wrote: On 26/09/11 13:48, Alan Pope wrote: I wondered what you lot might desire for 12.04? 1) better focus on accessibility earlier in the cycle 2) a more testable desktop earlier, this time it has been hard to test detailed stuff because the huge breakages get in the way. 3) a more menu-like applications lens, grouping them by category. 4) window management improvements relating to workspaces so alt-tab could have a per-workspace scope 5) aggressive and well funded marketing campaign 6) change Ubuntu friendly and Ubuntu certified stuff so that the sales process is part of the certification - i.e. refuse to sell the stuff, lose the badge. Also withdraw it from all products a vendor makes if they ship something with EFI secure boot that won't allow non-microsoft keys. 7) make an EFI secure boot signed live CD - this will be a problem as it won't build bit for bit from source. 8) a pony 9) moon on a stick Alan -- Libertus Solutions http://libertus.co.uk I'll preface this with positive praise for the improvements in Unity in 11.10 which is actually pleasant to use overall - especially the alt+tab switcher is now very functional. But . . . Could we puhleez be allowed at least some dregs of pitiful control over our Unity Desktops? Custom launchers and widgets? At the moment, the only way I can mount my encfs folders, for example, is in the terminal - unless I want to write a custom launcher by creating desktop files. There used to be a widget but it no longer works and I can't even create a custom launcher without setting aside half an hour. Sync-ui doesn't create a proper launcher button either and it's a total pain in the arse to fix. It's very, very irritating, wastes time and interrupts the flow of my work to have to open a terminal every five minutes when I'm working in LO or something - and I can't see how it inconveniences non-techies to have custom launchers *available*. I want to add buttons to the launcher for repetitive stuff like mounting things and syncing etc. Why is this too much to ask? Paula -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] What should be done for 12.04
Indeed, oneiric's Unity is currently taking so long to load on my Lenovo that I can make a cup of tea and do a spot of washing up in the meantime. Apps are slow to load, evolution lumbers like a mammoth. It's not terribly stable either. It was fabulous at Maverick, quick and stable - agree it'd be good to get Unity in such good shape first. -- Paula Graham Director | Fossbox http://www.fossbox.org.uk On Mon, 2011-09-26 at 13:03 +, Simon Watson wrote: Seconded :) --Original Message-- From: Tyler J. Wagner Sender: ubuntu-uk-boun...@lists.ubuntu.com To: UK Ubuntu Talk Cc: Alan Pope ReplyTo: UK Ubuntu Talk Subject: Re: [ubuntu-uk] What should be done for 12.04 Sent: 26 Sep 2011 14:02 On 2011-09-26 13:48, Alan Pope wrote: I wondered what you lot might desire for 12.04? I'd like to see the issues of power consumption on Intel chipsets (since 11.04) resolved. Regards, Tyler -- If we confuse dissent with disloyalty — if we deny the right of the individual to be wrong, unpopular, eccentric or unorthodox — if we deny the essence of racial equality then hundreds of millions in Asia and Africa who are shopping about for a new allegiance will conclude that we are concerned to defend a myth and our present privileged status. Every act that denies or limits the freedom of the individual in this country costs us the ... confidence of men and women who aspire to that freedom and independence of which we speak and for which our ancestors fought. -- Edward R. Murrow -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/ -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] What should be done for 12.04
I'm sorry, but if you want stability for a Server etc, you'd be going with RHEL, SELD or Cent OS, because they are the most stable (nowhere near the best, especially Cent OS), but they are rock stable. Ubuntu's market should be the end-user market of regular people, not business. Ubuntu is meant to be the cutting-edge, desirable and easy to use Linux System, not the stable, corporate one! Just saying, Nick. From: Liam Proven lpro...@gmail.com To: UK Ubuntu Talk ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com Sent: Monday, 26 September 2011, 15:19 Subject: Re: [ubuntu-uk] What should be done for 12.04 On 26 September 2011 13:48, Alan Pope a...@popey.com wrote: Now we're perilously close to releasing 11.10 onto the world, it's been asked [0] what things the developers would like to see the focus on for the 12.04 (Long Term Support) release. Personally I would like all core applications to support proxy servers properly. Especially as it's an LTS release which is arguably well-suited to corporate users who are those most often behind proxy servers. (ubuntu one file sync being something that doesn't work behind proxies) I wondered what you lot might desire for 12.04? Since nobody else has even mentioned it... How about ensuring complete feature parity between Unity Unity-2D? Apart from the 3D effects, I feel that they should look and work identically. At the moment, on Oneiric, from a quick look, they're not - e.g. the 2D version has differently-shaped buttons. I would also urge more testing of Unity on lower-end kit. I find the animations very jerky when moving between desktops, for instance. I would like an option to turn the animations off. Indeed, more customisability for Unity would be a good thing, even if that just means bringing confity or CompizConfig and the Ubuntu Unity Plugin into the distro as standard. AFAICS these don't work at all with Unity-2D, too, BTW. That's a hole that could do with closing. I found it much more pleasant to use after turning off the lairy coloured backgrounds and shrinking the buttons by about 25%, myself, for instance. -- Liam Proven • Info profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/lproven Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk • GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lpro...@gmail.com Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 • Cell: +44 7939-087884 • Fax: + 44 870-9151419 AIM/Yahoo/Skype: liamproven • MSN: lpro...@hotmail.com • ICQ: 73187508 -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/-- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] What should be done for 12.04
Nick McAlpin wrote: I'm sorry, but if you want stability for a Server etc, you'd be going with RHEL, SELD or Cent OS, because they are the most stable (nowhere near the best, especially Cent OS), but they are rock stable. Ubuntu's market should be the end-user market of regular people, not business. Ubuntu is meant to be the cutting-edge, desirable and easy to use Linux System, not the stable, corporate one! True as this may be (though I'd not put any of those on a server), it's patently not Canonical's view, and I've seen many a server happily run Ubuntu. Really, though, there's nothing to Ubuntu that makes it particularly poor in a server, perhaps it's not so well suited to a heterogenous pool of them (I've never had the pleasure of such a collection of machines), but as standalone boxes they're absolutely fine. -- Avi -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] What should be done for 12.04
On 26/09/11 13:48, Alan Pope wrote: Now we're perilously close to releasing 11.10 onto the world, it's been asked [0] what things the developers would like to see the focus on for the 12.04 (Long Term Support) release. Personally I would like all core applications to support proxy servers properly. Especially as it's an LTS release which is arguably well-suited to corporate users who are those most often behind proxy servers. (ubuntu one file sync being something that doesn't work behind proxies) I wondered what you lot might desire for 12.04? A default email client that actually works and doesn't grind to a halt, even when your sister sends you a 4MB photo of your nieces. Thunderbird is an improvement on Evolution but I find that neither of them is as fluid and well behaved with large email as MS Outlook 2003 is (which I use at work). I know that there are probably some settings I can fiddle with to make Thunderbird better behaved but I'd like it to be well behaved out of the box. Cheers, Bruno -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
