OT: (was: Re: The process for the file protocol died unexpectedly.)
On Monday, December 11, 2017 08:05:59 AM Tony van der Hoff wrote: > Never mind, I rebooted, and it now works. I have to chuckle when I think back to the Linux, well, I'll call them fanboys, that made fun of the Microsoft reboot solution. It has worked for me and others a fair number of times. Maybe more often since GUIs came into vogue.
Re: The process for the file protocol died unexpectedly.
On 11/12/17 12:01, Tony van der Hoff wrote: > On 10/12/17 11:48, Tony van der Hoff wrote: >> Hi, >> >> After upgrading Jessie to Stretch, using KDE, I am seeing the error message >> >> "The process for the file protocol died unexpectedly." >> >> when opening Dolphin in su mode. No files are shown. >> >> The same happens when invoking Dolphin from a root text console. >> >> >> This does feature in Google searches, but for dates around 2010, so >> unlikely to be relevant. >> >> >> Has anyone else here encountered this, and maybe found a work-round? >> >> >> Cheers, Tony >> >> > Nobody? Never mind, I rebooted, and it now works.
Re: The process for the file protocol died unexpectedly.
On 10/12/17 11:48, Tony van der Hoff wrote: > Hi, > > After upgrading Jessie to Stretch, using KDE, I am seeing the error message > > "The process for the file protocol died unexpectedly." > > when opening Dolphin in su mode. No files are shown. > > The same happens when invoking Dolphin from a root text console. > > > This does feature in Google searches, but for dates around 2010, so > unlikely to be relevant. > > > Has anyone else here encountered this, and maybe found a work-round? > > > Cheers, Tony > > Nobody?
The process for the file protocol died unexpectedly.
Hi, After upgrading Jessie to Stretch, using KDE, I am seeing the error message "The process for the file protocol died unexpectedly." when opening Dolphin in su mode. No files are shown. The same happens when invoking Dolphin from a root text console. This does feature in Google searches, but for dates around 2010, so unlikely to be relevant. Has anyone else here encountered this, and maybe found a work-round? Cheers, Tony