Re: [gentoo-user] managing chromium exceptions

2017-06-05 Thread Daniel Frey
On 06/04/2017 11:09 PM, Jorge Almeida wrote: > On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 1:33 AM, Daniel Frey wrote: >> On 06/04/2017 03:54 PM, Jorge Almeida wrote: > >>> Well, a plugin to make a browser barely usable. But what about a >>> functionality allegedly built in? >>> >>> >> Even stranger, chromium allowed

Re: [gentoo-user] managing chromium exceptions

2017-06-05 Thread Mick
On Monday 05 Jun 2017 10:18:04 Jorge Almeida wrote: > On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 9:49 AM, Mick wrote: > > I am able to go to Settings/Advanced/Privacy/Content Settings/JavaScript > > /Manage Exceptions, click on the left field that shows (in grey colour): > > > > [*.]sample.co.uk > > > > and I can t

Re: [gentoo-user] managing chromium exceptions

2017-06-05 Thread Jorge Almeida
On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 9:49 AM, Mick wrote: > > > I am able to go to Settings/Advanced/Privacy/Content Settings/JavaScript > /Manage Exceptions, click on the left field that shows (in grey colour): > > [*.]sample.co.uk > > and I can type in the URL you provided. Then on the right hand So THAT i

Re: [gentoo-user] managing chromium exceptions

2017-06-05 Thread Mick
On Monday 05 Jun 2017 07:09:42 Jorge Almeida wrote: > On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 1:33 AM, Daniel Frey wrote: > > On 06/04/2017 03:54 PM, Jorge Almeida wrote: > >> Well, a plugin to make a browser barely usable. But what about a > >> functionality allegedly built in? > > > > Even stranger, chromium al

Re: [gentoo-user] managing chromium exceptions

2017-06-04 Thread Jorge Almeida
On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 1:33 AM, Daniel Frey wrote: > On 06/04/2017 03:54 PM, Jorge Almeida wrote: >> Well, a plugin to make a browser barely usable. But what about a >> functionality allegedly built in? >> >> > Even stranger, chromium allowed me to block the URL you were trying to > block. > How?

Re: [gentoo-user] managing chromium exceptions

2017-06-04 Thread Daniel Frey
On 06/04/2017 03:54 PM, Jorge Almeida wrote: > On Sun, Jun 4, 2017 at 10:22 PM, Corbin Bird wrote: > >> Using Chromium and uMatrix / uBlock Origin Plugins, no problem with the >> page. No ads or Java errors. >> ( No, not the 'www-plugins/chrome-binary-plugins'. ) >> > Well, a plugin to make a bro

Re: [gentoo-user] managing chromium exceptions

2017-06-04 Thread Jorge Almeida
On Sun, Jun 4, 2017 at 10:22 PM, Corbin Bird wrote: > Using Chromium and uMatrix / uBlock Origin Plugins, no problem with the > page. No ads or Java errors. > ( No, not the 'www-plugins/chrome-binary-plugins'. ) > Well, a plugin to make a browser barely usable. But what about a functionality alle

Re: [gentoo-user] managing chromium exceptions

2017-06-04 Thread Corbin Bird
On 06/04/2017 09:39 AM, Daniel Frey wrote: > On 06/04/2017 02:17 AM, Jorge Almeida wrote: >> I just had the experience of visiting a linux-related site >> (http://libv.livejournal.com/22968.html) and seeing a panel with ads >> about house appliances (from a site I had actually visited before). >> T

Re: [gentoo-user] managing chromium exceptions

2017-06-04 Thread Daniel Frey
On 06/04/2017 07:39 AM, Daniel Frey wrote: > On 06/04/2017 02:17 AM, Jorge Almeida wrote: >> I just had the experience of visiting a linux-related site >> (http://libv.livejournal.com/22968.html) and seeing a panel with ads >> about house appliances (from a site I had actually visited before). >> T

Re: [gentoo-user] managing chromium exceptions

2017-06-04 Thread Daniel Frey
On 06/04/2017 02:17 AM, Jorge Almeida wrote: > I just had the experience of visiting a linux-related site > (http://libv.livejournal.com/22968.html) and seeing a panel with ads > about house appliances (from a site I had actually visited before). > The panel actually blocks part of the page, and is

[gentoo-user] managing chromium exceptions

2017-06-04 Thread Jorge Almeida
I just had the experience of visiting a linux-related site (http://libv.livejournal.com/22968.html) and seeing a panel with ads about house appliances (from a site I had actually visited before). The panel actually blocks part of the page, and is impossible to remove. This is caused by some javascr