Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Tue 16 Jun 2020 at 21:28:11 (+0200), l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > 16 juin 2020 16:30 de deb...@lionunicorn.co.uk: > > > It might be easier for people to follow the substance of this thread > > if you posted in such a way as to include one simple self-descriptive > > test in each post, and not includ

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On 18/06/20 8:08 am, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 08:02:11AM +1200, Richard Hector wrote: >> > See for more details. > >> I understand the phenomenon. I don't understand why modern software (eg >> the list software) still does it. >

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 08:02:11AM +1200, Richard Hector wrote: > > See for more details. > I understand the phenomenon. I don't understand why modern software (eg > the list software) still does it. Well, imagine you're a mailing list. A dozen peopl

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On 15/06/20 11:44 pm, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 10:13:11AM -0500, David Wright wrote: >> On Sat 13 Jun 2020 at 16:05:17 (+0200), l0f...@tuta.io wrote: >> > However, this extra ">" should have been deleted upon viewing the email, >> > no? >> >> How would the viewer's email cli

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi. On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 02:06:08PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > Hi, > > 13 juin 2020 à 21:14 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > > > You're looking at the wrong header. It's X-Spam-Status and > > X-Amavis-Spam-Status you should worry about. Authetication-Results is > > set by your MTA r

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 09:28:11PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > Hi, > > 16 juin 2020 14:50 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > > > And *now* it gets interesting. Because what's came to the list was text: > > > > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Content-Transfer-Encoding:

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi, 16 juin 2020 14:50 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > And *now* it gets interesting. Because what's came to the list was text: > > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Can we imagine that the ML simply 64-decodes the email and rese

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Tue 16 Jun 2020 at 13:10:38 (+0200), l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > 13 juin 2020 à 21:05 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 09:01:59PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > >> 13 juin 2020 à 17:12 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > >> > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 06:10:15PM +0300, Reco wrote: >

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi. On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 01:10:38PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > > Your e-mail passed DKIM test on my MTA with flying colors. > > > > Try that base64-encoded html thing next. > > > It was already base64 encoded, see below: > > --79Bu5A16qPEYcVIZL@tutanota > Content-Type:

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi, 13 juin 2020 à 21:05 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > Hi. > > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 09:01:59PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > >> 13 juin 2020 à 17:12 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: >> >> > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 06:10:15PM +0300, Reco wrote: >> > >> >> Let's see. >> >> >> >> >From what I saw t

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi, 13 juin 2020 à 21:14 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > You're looking at the wrong header. It's X-Spam-Status and > X-Amavis-Spam-Status you should worry about. Authetication-Results is > set by your MTA receiving your own mail from the list. > > But yes, they are both OK for this and your previ

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 10:13:11AM -0500, David Wright wrote: > On Sat 13 Jun 2020 at 16:05:17 (+0200), l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > > However, this extra ">" should have been deleted upon viewing the email, no? > > How would the viewer's email client know whether the > in > >From had been added by som

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Sat 13 Jun 2020 at 16:05:17 (+0200), l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > 13 juin 2020 à 14:21 de a...@strugglers.net: > > > The mbox mail archive format is a single file containing all > > messages concatenated together. Separate messages are recognised by > > a line that starts: > > > > >From > y...@examp

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/12/20 3:36 AM, A_Man_Without_Clue wrote: Mine appears under "Sound & Video" I'm using LXDE Debian Buster. Thanks a lot. That's where I just found mine.

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Andy Smith wrote: >On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 12:21:12PM +, Andy Smith wrote: >> The mbox mail archive format is a single file containing all >> messages concatenated together. Separate messages are recognised by >> a line that starts: >> >> >From y...@example.com ... > >Amusingly I didn't think

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 09:05:24PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > 13 juin 2020 à 21:01 de l0f...@tuta.io: > > > Ok let's see for me as well: > > > > >From my point of view > > > > >From: l0f4r0 > > > > l0f4r0 > > > Everything's ok: > > Authentication-Results: w3.tutanota.de (dis=neutral; info=dma

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

13 juin 2020 à 21:01 de l0f...@tuta.io: > Ok let's see for me as well: > > >From my point of view > > >From: l0f4r0 > > l0f4r0 > Everything's ok: Authentication-Results: w3.tutanota.de (dis=neutral; info=dmarc domain policy); dmarc=pass (dis=neutral p=quarantine; aspf=r; adkim=s; pSrc=dns) head

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi. On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 09:01:59PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > 13 juin 2020 à 17:12 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > > > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 06:10:15PM +0300, Reco wrote: > > > >> Let's see. > >> > >> >From what I saw this should fail DKIM test. > >> > >> And, for the good measur

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

13 juin 2020 à 17:12 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 06:10:15PM +0300, Reco wrote: > >> Let's see. >> >> >From what I saw this should fail DKIM test. >> >> And, for the good measure: >> >> >From: this is not a valid RFC-822 header >> > > Ok, clearly I don't have any problem

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi. On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 12:21:12PM +, Andy Smith wrote: > Hi, > > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 02:08:14PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > > 13 juin 2020 à 09:52 de a...@strugglers.net: > > > Looking at the email concerned, it had a line starting with "From" > > > quoted with a ">". > >

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 06:10:15PM +0300, Reco wrote: > Hi. > > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 04:32:02PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > > I've another example:  > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2020/06/msg00016.html > > One more time, I started a new line with "From" which got escaped with

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi. On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 04:32:02PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > I've another example:  > https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2020/06/msg00016.html > One more time, I started a new line with "From" which got escaped with a > leading ">". > Result: dkim=fail reason="body hash does no

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

I've another example: https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2020/06/msg00016.html One more time, I started a new line with "From" which got escaped with a leading ">". Result: dkim=fail reason="body hash does not match". Maybe it's the root cause after all... Does someone else have DKIM issues as w

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi, On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 09:28:45AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: > On Saturday 13 June 2020 09:19:39 Andy Smith wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 09:12:06AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: > > > No > present > > > > I think you are confused. None of us wrote any such line so I have > > no idea where

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi, 13 juin 2020 à 14:21 de a...@strugglers.net: > The mbox mail archive format is a single file containing all > messages concatenated together. Separate messages are recognised by > a line that starts: > > >From > y...@example.com> ... > > As you can imagine if a message body contained such te

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Saturday 13 June 2020 09:19:39 Andy Smith wrote: > Hi Gene, > > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 09:12:06AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: > > Here is a copy/paste of the from line as it arrives here > > From: l0f...@tuta.io > > No > present > > I think you are confused. None of us wrote any such line so I

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Sat, 2020-06-13 at 07:56 +, Andy Smith wrote: > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 07:52:55AM +, Andy Smith wrote: > > Looking at the email concerned, it had a line starting with "From" > > quoted with a ">". > > > > Mailing lists often do things like that, breaking DKIM. > > I will add that I re

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi Gene, On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 09:12:06AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: > Here is a copy/paste of the from line as it arrives here > From: l0f...@tuta.io > No > present I think you are confused. None of us wrote any such line so I have no idea where you are seeing it, unless you are looking at th

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Saturday 13 June 2020 08:24:49 Andy Smith wrote: > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 12:21:12PM +, Andy Smith wrote: > > The mbox mail archive format is a single file containing all > > messages concatenated together. Separate messages are recognised by > > > > a line that starts: > > >From y...@exam

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 12:21:12PM +, Andy Smith wrote: > The mbox mail archive format is a single file containing all > messages concatenated together. Separate messages are recognised by > a line that starts: > > >From y...@example.com ... Amusingly I didn't think to point out that by sendi

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi, On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 02:08:14PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > 13 juin 2020 à 09:52 de a...@strugglers.net: > > Looking at the email concerned, it had a line starting with "From" > > quoted with a ">". > > > Indeed! I hope it's not a mistake of mine (usually I proofread my emails > before

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi, 12 juin 2020 à 22:53 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > Yes, but I just cannot find that particular e-mail of yours with > Message-Id: <> m9er2er--...@tuta.io> >. > I didn't understand where you got the ID then? ^^ > And the search via Web interface finds nothing. > https://lists.debian.org/debi

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 07:52:55AM +, Andy Smith wrote: > Looking at the email concerned, it had a line starting with "From" > quoted with a ">". > > Mailing lists often do things like that, breaking DKIM. I will add that I recall that Debian postmasters have been asked before about making ch

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi, On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 10:30:44PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > 12 juin 2020 à 22:16 de mst...@debian.org: > > More information from the OP, it looks like the message sent to the list > > was base64 encoded html. So I'm guessing that the list software > > autoconverted that to plain text--

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Vi, 12 iun 20, 22:45:13, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > 12 juin 2020 à 22:32 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > > > Of course, > > refraining from sending html e-mails here would be easier solution ;) > > > I'd like nothing better but it seems this is not possible currently on > Tutanota web app. You co

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 11:53:40PM +0300, Reco wrote: No, the body is not interesting at all here. What I'm interested in is the result of DKIM check, and that's might be written in e-mail headers. Or not. dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)"

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 10:45:13PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > Hi Reco, > > 12 juin 2020 à 22:32 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > > > Removing Content-Type (and maybe Content-Transfer-Encoding) from OP's > > DKIM policy should do the trick, although it can has certain undesirable > > side-effect

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi Reco, 12 juin 2020 à 22:32 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > Removing Content-Type (and maybe Content-Transfer-Encoding) from OP's > DKIM policy should do the trick, although it can has certain undesirable > side-effects if MTA in question is used for other purposes. > Thanks, I will submit this

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 11:32:20PM +0300, Reco wrote: Hi. On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 04:16:23PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 12:36:29PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: > On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 09:52:57AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 03:48:42PM

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi. On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 04:16:23PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: > On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 12:36:29PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 09:52:57AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 03:48:42PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > > > > My email belo

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi, 12 juin 2020 à 22:16 de mst...@debian.org: > More information from the OP, it looks like the message sent to the list was > base64 encoded html. So I'm guessing that the list software autoconverted > that to plain text--which would mean there's no way to preserve a valid DKIM > signature.

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 12:36:29PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 09:52:57AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 03:48:42PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: My email below got a DKIM issue. It validated fine here, not a debian list issue. For the record, I l

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 09:52:57AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 03:48:42PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: My email below got a DKIM issue. It validated fine here, not a debian list issue. For the record, I looked at the wrong email. The right one did fail DKIM validatio

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 03:48:42PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: My email below got a DKIM issue. It validated fine here, not a debian list issue.

[OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi, My email below got a DKIM issue. This is not the first time for me on this ML so I'm trying to debug the situation with my email provider. Does someone on this list mind forwarding to me (as an attachment please, not inline) his/her own specimen of my original email below please? I need he

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

have you tried Alt+F2 (brings up a search menu X-D) On 6/12/20 10:31 AM, Joe wrote: > On Fri, 12 Jun 2020 10:36:20 +0900 > A_Man_Without_Clue wrote: > >> On 6/8/20 2:23 AM, Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: >>> Well, as the subject suggests, I'm a bit fed up with the logic >>> behind how installed programs

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On Fri, 12 Jun 2020 10:36:20 +0900 A_Man_Without_Clue wrote: > On 6/8/20 2:23 AM, Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: > > Well, as the subject suggests, I'm a bit fed up with the logic > > behind how installed programs are sorted out in the Applications > > menu. > > > > The need to go hunt down an installe

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/8/20 2:23 AM, Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: > Well, as the subject suggests, I'm a bit fed up with the logic behind > how installed programs are sorted out in the Applications menu. > > The need to go hunt down an installed application seems yester century. > > I just installed Picard, and it d

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

Hi, 11 juin 2020 à 23:13 de notoneofmyse...@gmx.de: > On 6/7/20 10:58 PM, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > >> Please just run the following commands as a simple user (no need to cd to >> anything): >> * cat /usr/share/applications/org.musicbrainz.Picard.desktop >> * cat /usr/share/metainfo/org.musicbrain

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/8/20 8:20 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote: Debian does very little customization of the various Desktop Environments, you are experiencing upstream's take on usability. Kind regards, Andrei Thanks a lot, Andrei, this is very, very helpful.

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/7/20 10:58 PM, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: Please just run the following commands as a simple user (no need to cd to anything): * cat /usr/share/applications/org.musicbrainz.Picard.desktop * cat /usr/share/metainfo/org.musicbrainz.Picard.appdata.xml * desktop-file-validate /usr/share/application

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/7/20 11:20 PM, Andrei POPESCU wrote: On Du, 07 iun 20, 19:23:24, Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: Well, as the subject suggests, I'm a bit fed up with the logic behind how installed programs are sorted out in the Applications menu. The need to go hunt down an installed application seems yester ce

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On Du, 07 iun 20, 19:23:24, Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: > Well, as the subject suggests, I'm a bit fed up with the logic behind > how installed programs are sorted out in the Applications menu. > > The need to go hunt down an installed application seems yester century. > > I just installed Picard, an

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: Well, as the subject suggests, I'm a bit fed up with the logic behind how installed programs are sorted out in the Applications menu. The need to go hunt down an installed application seems yester century. I just installed Picard, and it does not show up in Sound and Vid

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On Sun, 07 Jun, 2020 at 20:19:48 +0200, Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: >On 6/7/20 7:52 PM, Peter Ehlert wrote: [...] > What window manager/desktop suite are you using? > >GNOME Metacity That's unusual these days. Are you getting your application menu from gnome-panel?

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: > > suppose. But really, it's a basic user experience need, not like trying > to set up a server or virtual machine kind of project. :) Those are also user experience needs. The essence of Linux is that at any time, an ordinary user should be able to put on their sysadmin

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: > very different. I want to imagine a world of using a stable and secure > computer to achieve much more. Or, perhaps my frustration is influenced > by chastisement from a friend recently, a programmer, who said; life's > short, time is precious, why spend time getting thin

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

Hi, 7 juin 2020 à 19:23 de notoneofmyse...@gmx.de: > I just installed Picard, and it does not show up in Sound and Video, > where logic would suggest it be. > >From my side, Picard appears under Multimedia>MusicBrainz Picard. Here is the related desktop file (org.musicbrainz.Picard.desktop): [De

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

Hi, 7 juin 2020 à 22:03 de notoneofmyse...@gmx.de: > Thanks for your help. Please see above. To be sure, I'm running as > 'root.' Should I log into 'regular' user and do these again? > Please just run the following commands as a simple user (no need to cd to anything): * cat /usr/share/applicati

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/7/20 10:22 PM, Marco Möller wrote: I am surprised about Ubuntu in your experience not being as stable and secure as Debian. While Debian is a philosophy and developing an extremely good OS, Ubuntu builds on top of it. Substituting philosophy by commercial interests and that's when I left,

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/7/20 9:33 PM, Joe wrote: Wouldn't that be something like Android? Where the user no longer owns his computer, and therefore cannot break it, where there is one and only one minimally-customisable user interface, where only software approved by the OS vendor is available where the softwa

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 07.06.20 19:54, Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: (...) And I will add, it was never the ambition of Debian to replace the User experience with Windows or OSX, unlike Ubuntu and many others. I've stuck with Debian for what I cannot find in Ubuntu; stability and security. But user experience is well

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/7/20 9:24 PM, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: OK, just to be sure, can you please copy/paste in 2 text files the content of: * /usr/share/applications/org.musicbrainz.Picard.desktop * /usr/share/metainfo/org.musicbrainz.Picard.appdata.xml xscreensaver-properties.desktop yelp.desktop zulucrypt-gui.d

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On Sun, 7 Jun 2020 19:54:07 +0200 Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: > I've stuck with Debian > for what I cannot find in Ubuntu; stability and security. But user > experience is well below compared to other distros. It's unfortunate, > then it seems, that Linux seems destined for the geek world. This is >

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

OK, just to be sure, can you please copy/paste in 2 text files the content of: * /usr/share/applications/org.musicbrainz.Picard.desktop * /usr/share/metainfo/org.musicbrainz.Picard.appdata.xml + give us the output for: desktop-file-validate /usr/share/applications/org.musicbrainz.Picard.desktop B

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/7/20 8:48 PM, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: What is your output of: dpkg -L picard Are you sure you want it, it's pretty long. I've made a text document of it. It's attached, all 8 pages of it. (.odt) Thanks for asking and helping. picard_issues.odt Description: application/vnd.oasis.opendoc

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

What is your output of: dpkg -L picard

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/7/20 7:52 PM, Peter Ehlert wrote: On 6/7/20 10:23 AM, Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: Well, as the subject suggests, I'm a bit fed up with the logic behind how installed programs are sorted out in the Applications menu. The need to go hunt down an installed application seems yester century. I j

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/7/20 10:23 AM, Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: Well, as the subject suggests, I'm a bit fed up with the logic behind how installed programs are sorted out in the Applications menu. The need to go hunt down an installed application seems yester century. I just installed Picard, and it does not sh

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/7/20 7:37 PM, Richard Owlett wrote: On 06/07/2020 12:23 PM, Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: Well, as the subject suggests, I'm a bit fed up with the logic behind how installed programs are sorted out in the Applications menu. The need to go hunt down an installed application seems yester century.

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/7/20 7:37 PM, Richard Owlett wrote: On 06/07/2020 12:23 PM, Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: Well, as the subject suggests, I'm a bit fed up with the logic behind how installed programs are sorted out in the Applications menu. The need to go hunt down an installed application seems yester century.

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/7/20 7:37 PM, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: From my side, Picard appears under Multimedia>MusicBrainz Picard. Here is the related desktop file (org.musicbrainz.Picard.desktop): Thanks a lot. But I do not have 'Multimedia,' instead Applications > Sound & Video Thanks.

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 06/07/2020 12:23 PM, Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: Well, as the subject suggests, I'm a bit fed up with the logic behind how installed programs are sorted out in the Applications menu. The need to go hunt down an installed application seems yester century. I just installed Picard, and it does not

why !oh why Debian and application list

Well, as the subject suggests, I'm a bit fed up with the logic behind how installed programs are sorted out in the Applications menu. The need to go hunt down an installed application seems yester century. I just installed Picard, and it does not show up in Sound and Video, where logic would sug