So... a comment about the lack of a vetting process is immediately
followed by a fix with no explanation, nor any testing or user
acceptance.
I don't think so, as stated there are plenty of Proxies in the world and
I've recently discovered that proxy.pac files are vary much a part of
corporate
The bug is incomplete because there has been no testing if the change
implemented does either of these two things.
1. Does what the fix was intended to do.
2. Actually corrects the bug posted here.
Until there is some level of testing and user acceptance, the bug is not
fixed. Because there is
For sure, and it's not like there is some one out there behind a bunch
of proxies that would even begin to be able to test new proxy code.
This really will take a community effort, not just some commit by some
one who many not have ever used a proxy.
There surly is something wrong with the
http://pastebin.com/He2KqUGF
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to the bug report.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/9441
Title:
the locate pointer option breaks other keybindings
To manage notifications about this bug go
The solution for me, using xfce4, was to logout and into gnome-shell.
Then I could change the setting... Using gconf-editor didn't work, the
option was checked when I looked at it in gnome's control center under
mouse. When I loged back into xfce4, all was/is good. xev reports ctl
as it should.
Mahyar,
I haven't had this in a while, however it's never glitched my grfx. What
driver/card do you have? Any extra options enabled?
I use also Gnome Shell, more information on your issue would be nice.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs,
I would love to form a project/team/comity that would work with
developers and package maintainers to address proxy issues and also
maintain a minimum compliance specification. This task defiantly needs
Linux Plumbers type endeavor.
I believe that proxy support needs to be a future release
I'd just like to update the record to include the trouble shooting steps
for defective media. However after attempting to do so I realized I was
no expert. Trying again seams best. Once an issue is reported by
multiple media using multiple devices, it most likely is not defective
media.
badblocks -n comes to mind. If the bootable USB drive passes this
test, then it's 100% good.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to gvfs in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/744836
Title:
gvfsd-metadata crashed with
I should learn to keep my mouth shut. badblocks -n is likely to cause
USB flash defects, however it would indicate that the drive WAS 110%
good.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to gvfs in Ubuntu.
Does it look like this is the same?
bamestnik@arcadia:~$ gdb huludesktop
GNU gdb (Ubuntu/Linaro 7.3.92-0ubuntu2) 7.3.92
Copyright (C) 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
License GPLv3+: GNU GPL version 3 or later http://gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html
This is free software: you are free to change and
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 744836 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/744836
** Visibility changed to: Public
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to gvfs in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/909749
Title:
** Visibility changed to: Public
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to nautilus in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/909750
Title:
nautilus assert failure: nautilus: ../../src/xcb_io.c:528: _XAllocID:
Assertion
Unfortunately proxy support is currently lacking and there will likely
not be any solution.
From what I can tell proxy support was re-engendered and the new
implementation is inadequate. It's unclear if there will be any further
development and the previous implementation will likely not be re-
This is also an issue in Debian and I've attempted to create a task
force dedicated to assisting developers and packagers with maintaining
stable proxy support.
However there is at least one person, with no objections other then
myself, who believes that patches for proxy support should not be
A good start would be a bug database(perhaps a tag in launchpad and
bugs.d.o) with perhaps a wiki that would outline the current status and
issues with running behind a proxy. The main goal would help /new/
users in the trial and error department with a secondary goal to
identify how much work
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to gnome-utils in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/880015
Title:
Screen/Window shot(s) blank: All black with mouse courser properly
rendered.
To manage notifications about this
Public bug reported:
Done using hot key(PrtScrn) or via cmd line.
Running Gnome3-Shell, Radeon Open Drivers. Proprietary Drivers not an
option, if there is a Bug it should be reported... not ignored in light
of another solution.
ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 11.10
Package:
Agreed, the new Proxy code is vary lacking. I understand that there are
some ppl who are great at designing and implementing APIs and Dialog(s),
however they shouldn't trample over well tested code that is above there
ability to support... What's a Fancy Plate with nothing on it?
We need to
I have experience with network coding and am able to write code to talk
to both Socks(several variants) and HTTP Proxy servers. Are there any
others?
What troubles me is the decision tree that should be called every time a
connection is requested. This Tree needs to include a state-full matrix
I believe the wishlist Importance of this bug is incorrect as it
represents a feature that was working/did exist and now it's been taken
away.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to gnome-control-center in Ubuntu.
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 843268 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/843268
I missed protocol IPv4/IPv6. I.E. with a routed IPv6 and using socks
instead of NAT for IPv4 only.
I just tested at http://ipv6-test.com/ and IPv6 is totally disabled for
me.
--
You received this bug
** Changed in: gdm (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete = New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to gdm in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/608389
Title:
GDM 4 XDMCP installed with no xserver.
To manage
Public bug reported:
I'm unable to configure devices on my local network via web anymore
because the proxy server has no access to these resources.
There is a need for application specific settings as well as
application/account, *application/protocol, and **application/port and
perhaps
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to gnome-control-center in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/868735
Title:
[Network-Proxy] Missing exclusion list for local network(s).
To manage notifications about this bug go
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 843268 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/843268
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 843268
gnome-control-center doesn't allow to specify proxy exceptions
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs,
Confirmed:
cheako@arcadia:~$ lsb_release -a
No LSB modules are available.
Distributor ID: Ubuntu
Description:Ubuntu oneiric (development branch)
Release:11.10
Codename: oneiric
arcadia:~# apt-get update
arcadia:~# apt-get dist-upgrade
The following packages will be upgraded:
Hello,
I've just reconfirmed this bug exists with several Telepathy ?backends? when
attempting to use a SOCKS proxy... an HTTP connect proxy is configured to
forward connections through the available socks proxy.
I've switched to Pidgin and this is confirmed to work, however it's in
no way a
Sorry, The documentation referances [serverStandared] or something and
this should be in gdm.conf or If I add these things to custom.conf. No,
I'm sure that by default you can't alter how the X server is started as
this is being a bug.
Like a feature that was removed.
--
GDM 4 XDMCP installed
** Attachment added: Dependencies.txt
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/52273008/Dependencies.txt
--
GDM 4 XDMCP installed with no xserver.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/608389
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to gdm in
Ohh I forgot... I can run an Xserver, but as I'm running under coLinux
it would be useless.
--
GDM 4 XDMCP installed with no xserver.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/608389
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to gdm in ubuntu.
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: gdm
I'd like to run GDM with no xserver installed. After the install I need
to reconfigure GDM to not try and load 0=Xorg...
Where did my configuration files go?
gdmsetup is locked and broken, something about an .s* thing not being permitted.
GDM will
32 matches
Mail list logo
