See the man pages:
"... and return (either in the return code, or on standard output) the users
input."
The answer to "--question" is returned in the return code, not in
standard output.
user@ubuntu:~$ zenity --question --title="Answer the question." --text="Yes or
No?" # answering yes
Remote watch updated, see comment #35
** Changed in: xserver-xorg-driver-ati
Importance: Medium => Unknown
** Changed in: xserver-xorg-driver-ati
Remote watch: freedesktop.org Bugzilla #42162 =>
gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/amd/issues #227
--
You received this bug notification because you
The pkg-website only provides a searchable index on the packages in
Ubuntu. If a certain package is not available in a certain Ubuntu
release, then this is outside the responsibility of the pkg-website
** Project changed: pkg-website => enchant-2 (Ubuntu)
--
You received this bug notification
Due to the fact that the system in question showed two different issues,
there is a mix of information related to the two problems.
I have tried to clean that up a bit.
** Package changed: ubuntu-release-upgrader (Ubuntu) => software-
properties (Ubuntu)
--
You received this bug notification
My understanding was that the limits for directly reachable computers in
IPv4 is called "netmask" and in IPv6 the equivalent is called "prefix".
gnome-comtrol-center 1:3.36.5-0ubuntu3 on Ubuntu focal correctly shows
these different labels for manual settings in IPv4 and IPv6.
In my opinion the
The cause is that both libwacom2 and libwacom9 depend on libwacom-common
in the version identical to the libwacom(number) version.
I assume that you have libwacom2 and libwacom-common installed from a
previous Ubuntu release, or a older version in Jammy that meanwhile has
been superseded.
sudo
Probably duplicate of Bug #1930982
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to firefox in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1931138
Title:
Firefox 89.0 broke a lot of things
Status in firefox package in Ubuntu:
New
Bug
Re: "I could not find any information what "phased 20%" means."
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#Phasing
https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/phased-updates-in-apt-in-21-04/20345
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to
/dev/sde2 916G 870G 0 100% /
Your root file system is (almost) full.
You might run the command
du -schx /*
to see the directories that use most space, and then dig further to identify
which files/directories consume too much space and do clean-up.
--
You received this bug notification because
to the "confusing description":
Maybe a misinterpretation on my side. I booted the system, logged in,
and immediately received a pop-up informing me of a crash. This might
have been caused by the presence of a not-yet-reported crash file from
an earlier session, although I cannot remember that I
Is this still Bug #1820859 ?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to nautilus in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1922290
Title:
nautilus crashed with SIGSEGV in update_dbus_opened_locations()
Status in nautilus
For verification I downloaded ubuntu-21.04-beta-desktop-amd64.iso
(Ubuntu 21.04 "Hirsute Hippo" - Beta amd64 (20210331.1)) started it in
VirtualBox ("Try Ubuntu") and also experience a crash for the "nautilus
--version" command, see attachment.
** Attachment added: "Screenshot showing the crash"
executing the command
nautilus --version
in a terminal window also crashes.
** Information type changed from Private to Public
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to nautilus in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1922290
Question #692926 on webkit2gtk in Ubuntu changed:
https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/webkit2gtk/+question/692926
Manfred Hampl proposed the following answer:
Did you read FAQ #3037 and the documents linked from there about updates
in already published Ubuntu Releases?
What
Question #692926 on webkit2gtk in Ubuntu changed:
https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/webkit2gtk/+question/692926
Status: Open => Answered
Manfred Hampl proposed the following answer:
What is the relationship between the publicaltion date of Ubuntu 20.10
and backporting webkit
Question #692926 on webkit2gtk in Ubuntu changed:
https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/webkit2gtk/+question/692926
Status: Open => Needs information
Manfred Hampl requested more information:
Why do you need that version of webkitgtk in focal?
What is the benefit of updat
Ubuntu 20.04 needs
- either the HPLIP version 3.20.3+dfsg0-2 packages from the Ubuntu repositories
- or HPLIP version 3.20.5 (or higher) from the HPLIP pages
Version 3.20.3 from the HPLIP pages does not work.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages,
This is a known problem.
See Bug #1866844 comment #12 for an emergency repair.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to gnome-software in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1867469
Title:
Update failed on allmost all
Video showing the problem
** Attachment added: "Video showing the problem"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-shell-extension-ubuntu-dock/+bug/1867406/+attachment/5336904/+files/Ubuntu%2020.04.webm
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
My experience with that matter and how to reproduce:
Ubuntu 20.04 (development) installed.
Ubuntu dock bar at the left (or right):
You can easily re-arrange the icons by dragging one of them up or down with
your mouse and pressed left mouse button.
When hovering between two icons, they slide up
** Package changed: ubuntu => gnome-shell-extension-ubuntu-dock (Ubuntu)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to gnome-shell-extension-ubuntu-dock in
Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1867406
Title:
Ubuntu 20.04
Now with the updated snap packages published, (see Bug #1856196 ), when
will the pulseaudio packages be re-published?
Everyone on Xenial and Bionic who did a package update between
2019-12-11 and 2019-12-12 now has orphaned pulseaudio packages
installed, blocking the installation of additional
Sebastien Bacher (seb128)wrote on 2019-12-12: #5
The Xenial/Bionic SRUs have been removed until the Recommends on snapd gets
lowered to a Suggest
And when will they be re-published?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to
Shouldn't there be sub-tasks for "Firefox on Ubuntu xenial" "Firefox on
Ubuntu bionic" "Firefox on Ubuntu cosmic" and "Firefox on Ubuntu
disco" to allow tracking the status for the older supported Ubuntu
Releases?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
The contents of the message look like the search output for a certain apk file
provided by virustotal:
https://www.virustotal.com/#/file/76e27c4b09f9c1cbbf0b414719b741d3087fc744f6de9431a282fbd976bd445a/detection
I cannot see a relationship to iputils in Ubuntu.
--
You received this bug
You can upload the .crash file to this bug report with help of the "Add
attachment or patch" button at the end of the bug page which opens this link:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-shell/+bug/1789962/+addcomment
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
Looking at Jeremy Bicha's error message
org.gnome.Epiphany.desktop[12949]: FATAL: Could not allocate gigacage
memory with maxAlignment = 34359738368, totalSize = 103079215104.
"totalSize = 103079215104" stands for a memory allocation of 96 GiB.
What the heck is webkit2gtk doing with so much
@Luca Ciavatta:
Also your problem has nothing to do with deja-dup and webkit and is probably
caused by bug #1754564
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to deja-dup in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1751460
Title:
@venturia: The issue of not being able to start an executable from
within nautilus has nothing to do with this deja-dup failure. That
problem has been reported as Bug #1747711
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to deja-dup in
(correction: Virtualbox version 5.2.8)
** Description changed:
- Ubuntu 18.04 in virtualbox 5.0.8 on Windows 10
+ Ubuntu 18.04 in virtualbox 5.2.8 on Windows 10
ProblemType: Crash
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 18.04
Package: deja-dup 37.1-1fakesync1
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu
Public bug reported:
Ubuntu 18.04 in virtualbox 5.0.8 on Windows 10
ProblemType: Crash
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 18.04
Package: deja-dup 37.1-1fakesync1
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 4.15.0-10.11-generic 4.15.3
Uname: Linux 4.15.0-10-generic x86_64
ApportVersion: 2.20.8-0ubuntu10
Architecture: amd64
In Ubuntu the differences in /lib/udev/hwdb.d/20-sane.hwdb from libsane1
1.0.27-1~experimental2ubuntu1 are
amd64:
# This file was automatically created based on description files (*.desc)
# by sane-desc 3.5 from sane-backends 1.0.27 on Fri Oct 27 06:58:13 2017
...
i386:
# This file was
@Karl Schindler:
What you see is probably a bug in Eclipse, see
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=479646
Something that eclipse has to work on.
** Bug watch added: Eclipse bugs #479646
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=479646
--
You received this bug notification
Doesn't the first grep command in is_module_blacklisted need adding a ^
identical to the second one -
"grep -G \"blacklist.*%
vs.
"grep -G \"^blacklist.*%
to avoid matching commented-out entries (like "#backlist noveau" etc.)?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
What about precise?
http://www.ubuntu.com/usn/usn-2656-1/ does not contain any information
about Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, but http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-
security/cve/pkg/firefox.html lists 23 open CVEs for the precise version
of firefox.
There was a recent comment from the bug reporter in bug #948053
i wanna have the nvidia-173 cause i can't have a good resolution
whithout
If the display hardware is
GraphicsCard:
NVIDIA Corporation G72 [GeForce 7500 LE] [10de:01dd] (rev a1) (prog-if 00
[VGA controller])
as shown in this bug
Due to missing security updates, the available chromium-browser in
precise is vulnerable to a number of security weaknesses, among others
* Upstream release 43.0.2357.65:
- CVE-2015-1252: Sandbox escape in Chrome.
- CVE-2015-1253: Cross-origin bypass in DOM.
- CVE-2015-1254:
Recent builds failed, see e.g. https://launchpad.net/~canonical-
chromium-builds/+archive/ubuntu/stage/+build/7557484 for the failure of
the 43.0.2357.81 version for i386 on precise:
FAILED: if [ ! -e lib/libblink_web.so -o ! -e lib/libblink_web.so.TOC ]; then
** Changed in: cairo (Ubuntu)
Status: Invalid = Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to cairo in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1414333
Title:
libcairo-dev depencencies in Utopic
Status in cairo
This is a regression bug caused by the fact that for correction of bug
#1391857 a package cairo 1.13.0~20140204-0ubuntu1.1 was created in
trusty only but not in utopic.
See https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cairo
Steps for duplicating that bug:
On a trusty implementation with -updates
Putting sudo in front of a command for redirecting output to a file
where you do not have write permission, does not help.
You might try
gdk-pixbuf-query-loaders | sudo tee
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/gdk-pixbuf-2.0/2.10.0/loaders.cache
--
You received this bug notification because you are a
Ok, it seem that the version 1.3.1-3 in utopic does no more have that problem.
But how can an updated version be delivered to trusty (and eventually saucy and
precise)?
Should an SRU request or a backport request be issued?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
I would have expected the target of this bug to be rather tiff or tiff3
than cups.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to cups in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1312103
Title:
tiff3 not available in 14.04 for
See also comments of the debian maintainer for tiff and tiff3 on
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/tiff3/+bug/1271714
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to cups in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1312103
Title:
I doubt the validity of this bug report. The text has been copy/pasted
from the question doucment https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source
/software-center/+question/222801 that is more than a year old, and that
is aready solved.
In that question document the command sequence
sudo apt-get
I am converting that bug report into a question document, because that
seems to me the better area for dealing with it.
** Changed in: software-center (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete = Invalid
** Converted to question:
Potential workaround:
Open a terminal and issue the command
gksudo gksudo gedit /var/lib/dpkg/info/fglrx-pxpress.postinst
This will most probably ask for the password and then open an editor
with the post installation script loaded.
Scroll down to the end of the file and then about ten lines
It seems to me that the post installation script aborts with status 1 if
fglrx is not installed.
There is in postinst:
# Make sure we use the discrete card
has_aticonfig=$(which aticonfig)
if [ X$has_aticonfig != X ]; then
aticonfig --px-dgpu
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1219998 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1219998
Seems to be duplicate of bug 1219998
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1219998
package fglrx-pxpress 0.3~hybrid0.0.1 failed to install/upgrade:
sub-processo script post-installation
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1219998 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1219998
Seems to be duplicate of bug # 1219998 even if there is a different
version of fglrx-pxpress
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1219998
package fglrx-pxpress 0.3~hybrid0.0.1 failed to
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1219998 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1219998
Seems to be duplicate of bug # 1219998 even if there is a different
version of fglrx-pxpress
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1219998
package fglrx-pxpress 0.3~hybrid0.0.1 failed to
The issue has been reported to Launchpad itself with bug # 973212
So this might be marked as duplicate.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to chromium-browser in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/722171
Title:
Some
** Summary changed:
- Please ship pkg-config file lixbul.pc in firefox-dev
+ Please ship pkg-config file libxul.pc in firefox-dev
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to firefox in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1030504
53 matches
Mail list logo
