Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.os.linux.ubuntu > #185812 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-01-06 23:35 +0100 |
| Last post | 2016-01-11 12:58 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 236 — 32 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.os.linux.ubuntu
Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-01-06 23:35 +0100
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-06 18:11 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-06 19:23 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-07 09:03 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-07 10:35 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-07 16:03 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-09 09:41 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-01-09 10:03 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-09 09:14 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-09 11:37 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-09 09:08 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-09 11:42 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2016-01-10 09:59 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-01-09 12:22 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-09 17:36 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Catzilla <catzilla@pussyboss.invalid> - 2016-01-09 23:53 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-09 20:38 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Catzilla <catzilla@pussyboss.invalid> - 2016-01-10 02:03 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Catzilla <catzilla@pussyboss.invalid> - 2016-01-10 02:54 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-09 22:21 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Catzilla <catzilla@pussyboss.invalid> - 2016-01-10 03:24 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-09 23:21 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Catzilla <catzilla@pussyboss.invalid> - 2016-01-10 04:25 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Catzilla <catzilla@pussyboss.invalid> - 2016-01-10 03:29 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-09 22:18 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Catzilla <catzilla@pussyboss.invalid> - 2016-01-10 03:20 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-09 23:19 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Catzilla <catzilla@pussyboss.invalid> - 2016-01-10 04:23 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-10 00:40 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Catzilla <catzilla@pussyboss.invalid> - 2016-01-10 12:47 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-10 08:40 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Catzilla <catzilla@pussyboss.invalid> - 2016-01-10 14:30 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-10 00:29 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Catzilla <catzilla@pussyboss.invalid> - 2016-01-10 12:32 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-10 08:28 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Catzilla <catzilla@pussyboss.invalid> - 2016-01-10 13:33 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-10 08:42 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Catzilla <catzilla@pussyboss.invalid> - 2016-01-10 13:55 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Penny Tration <fedora_the_explora@asia.com> - 2016-01-10 22:49 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-10 19:07 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Penny Tration <fedora_the_explora@asia.com> - 2016-01-11 02:56 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-11 00:14 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-01-11 20:35 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2016-01-10 12:15 -0200
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Catzilla <catzilla@pussyboss.invalid> - 2016-01-10 14:23 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-10 14:09 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-09 20:32 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-10 06:27 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-10 08:25 -0500
Buh bye redux Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-10 08:26 -0500
Re: Buh bye redux DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-10 08:41 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl> - 2016-01-10 17:27 +0100
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2016-01-10 11:32 -0200
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-09 18:43 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-09 22:17 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-09 23:10 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-10 00:42 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-10 06:30 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-10 05:09 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-10 08:24 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-10 06:44 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-10 14:05 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-10 13:03 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-10 08:52 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-01-10 08:27 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2016-01-10 11:03 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-01-10 12:25 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-01-10 15:13 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2016-01-10 17:29 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-01-10 18:31 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-11 03:59 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2016-01-11 08:11 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-11 10:22 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 10:32 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-01-11 08:44 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2016-01-11 16:51 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-12 04:18 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-12 08:14 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-12 07:01 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-12 09:43 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-12 08:40 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-12 15:58 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-01-12 08:49 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-12 10:42 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Eef Hartman <E.J.M.Hartman@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 18:33 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-12 16:00 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2016-01-13 12:21 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-13 08:10 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-13 06:48 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-13 12:59 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-13 14:24 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-13 16:51 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-01-14 14:58 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-01-14 11:24 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-14 11:35 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) stepore <linshine@here.now> - 2016-01-12 15:04 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Eef Hartman <E.J.M.Hartman@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 22:38 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-01-11 15:53 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Eef Hartman <E.J.M.Hartman@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 01:01 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-01-11 18:29 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Eef Hartman <E.J.M.Hartman@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 04:14 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-12 04:27 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-12 03:51 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-12 03:48 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-01-12 03:22 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-12 12:47 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-01-12 08:31 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2016-01-12 11:16 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-12 10:47 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-12 12:58 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-01-12 10:01 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-12 15:12 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-01-13 08:58 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-12 10:46 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-01-12 11:56 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-13 04:05 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-01-13 08:38 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-13 14:27 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2016-01-13 12:30 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2016-01-13 13:44 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Jim Diamond <Jim.Diamond@deletethis.AcadiaU.ca> - 2016-01-13 14:11 -0400
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-13 14:30 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-13 16:52 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Eef Hartman <E.J.M.Hartman@gmail.com> - 2016-01-14 00:16 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-14 05:51 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Jim Diamond <Jim.Diamond@deletethis.AcadiaU.ca> - 2016-01-14 08:56 -0400
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-14 09:34 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-14 11:43 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-14 11:50 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-01-14 08:52 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Jim Diamond <Jim.Diamond@deletethis.AcadiaU.ca> - 2016-01-14 14:00 -0400
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-14 13:28 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-12 12:56 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 18:17 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-13 05:11 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 09:38 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-13 08:42 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-13 09:48 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-13 09:58 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-01-13 08:51 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-13 15:31 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-01-13 23:03 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-14 02:34 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-13 14:35 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-13 04:44 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Eef Hartman <E.J.M.Hartman@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 14:51 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-13 15:36 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-10 13:36 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) stepore <linshine@here.now> - 2016-01-10 20:49 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-01-10 20:58 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) stepore <linshine@here.now> - 2016-01-10 21:02 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Eef Hartman <E.J.M.Hartman@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 08:54 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2016-01-11 08:00 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-10 08:26 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-10 08:34 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Kirk_Von_Rockstein <Kirk_Von_Rockstein@nowhere.invalid> - 2016-01-10 10:41 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-10 04:56 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Kirk_Von_Rockstein <Kirk_Von_Rockstein@nowhere.invalid> - 2016-01-11 15:23 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-12 04:36 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Henry Crun <mike@rechtman.com> - 2016-01-12 14:04 +0200
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-12 12:52 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-12 06:18 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-12 09:58 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-12 08:48 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Henry Crun <mike@rechtman.com> - 2016-01-13 03:49 +0200
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-13 05:13 -0700
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2016-01-10 09:53 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Auric__" <not.my.real@email.address> - 2016-01-07 05:55 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) stepore <linshine@here.now> - 2016-01-07 00:21 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) stepore <linshine@here.now> - 2016-01-07 00:26 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2016-01-07 13:54 -0200
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-01-07 19:28 +0100
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-07 21:52 +0100
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2016-01-08 11:08 -0200
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-08 08:38 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2016-01-08 17:14 -0200
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-01-08 20:51 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-09 01:39 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-01-09 13:24 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> - 2016-01-09 16:32 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-10 00:45 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2016-01-10 11:42 -0200
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2016-01-09 08:34 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2016-01-09 10:41 -0200
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-01-09 13:33 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-10 00:41 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-10 08:16 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2016-01-10 12:08 -0200
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-01-10 14:24 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-01-09 09:02 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl> - 2016-01-08 18:26 +0100
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) stepore <linshine@here.now> - 2016-01-08 22:56 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2016-01-09 10:51 -0200
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-09 14:12 +0100
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-01-09 09:13 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-09 15:32 +0100
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-01-09 09:59 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-01-09 10:01 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-09 16:52 +0100
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-01-09 11:07 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-09 17:31 +0100
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-01-09 12:30 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) stepore <linshine@here.now> - 2016-01-09 10:33 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-09 21:47 +0100
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-01-10 10:03 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-10 17:39 +0100
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-01-10 12:28 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-10 19:03 +0100
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl> - 2016-01-10 19:26 +0100
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-10 19:31 +0100
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-10 14:15 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-10 21:08 +0100
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl> - 2016-01-10 22:37 +0100
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-10 18:57 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2016-01-10 14:30 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-10 22:40 +0100
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-01-10 20:56 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-01-11 08:52 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2016-01-11 10:11 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-01-11 09:06 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) system8752@home.comm - 2016-01-11 01:10 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Harold Stevens <wookie@cindy.localdomain> - 2016-01-11 06:21 -0600
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-01-11 08:29 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-11 08:54 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-01-11 12:06 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-11 16:53 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-01-11 16:25 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-12 02:42 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-11 16:54 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Catzilla <catzilla@pussyboss.invalid> - 2016-01-12 00:20 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-01-11 09:03 -0800
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) pioruns <cvbehaf@b2.cy> - 2016-01-07 20:08 +0000
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) F8BOE <f8boe@bluemail.ch> - 2016-01-08 07:47 +0100
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-08 06:45 -0500
Re: Vote for Ubuntu! ;) mike antipasto <pizzadude@mycomputerrox.org> - 2016-01-09 00:15 -0500
Re: Vote for Your Distro Big Al <Big_Al@invalid.com> - 2016-01-11 12:58 -0500
Page 4 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 12 Next page →
| From | crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 06:44 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <n6tn3b$8kk$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #185977 |
Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > crankypuss wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > >> Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >> >>> DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote this copyrighted missive and >>> expects royalties: >>> >>>> On Sat, 09 Jan 2016 18:43:30 -0700, crankypuss >>>> <invalid@invalid.invalid> Gave us: >>>> >>>>>Is there a way to get xcreensaver to lock immediately? >>>> >>>> Maybe set it to lock (prompt for password)and zero minutes >>>> perhaps. Otherwise one minute is the minimum, IIRC. >>> >>> xscreensaver-command -lock >>> >>> Easy to bind to a hot-key if one wishes. >>> >>> That's my method, anyway. Your "GUI" may have something you prefer. >> >> Interesting, never heard of xscreensaver-command before, "which >> xscreensaver-command" comes up with zip, synaptic comes up with nada >> for search results against "xscreensaver-command". >> >> I'm running LXDE on Debian jessie. What package is "xscreensaver- >> command" part of, that it doesn't show up in synaptic search results? > > The xscreensaver package. > Installs a bunch of xscreensaver* programs. > > man xscreensave shows 'em in the SEE ALSO section. Got it, much more convenient, thanks. -- http://totally-portable-software.blogspot.com [Sun Nov 22: "Total Portability is not binary"]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 14:05 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <3sa59bhr81chdq3uon6mdnrgabn9qfsrc9@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #185987 |
On Sun, 10 Jan 2016 06:44:42 -0700, crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> Gave us: >Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > >> crankypuss wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >> >>> Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>> >>>> DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote this copyrighted missive and >>>> expects royalties: >>>> >>>>> On Sat, 09 Jan 2016 18:43:30 -0700, crankypuss >>>>> <invalid@invalid.invalid> Gave us: >>>>> >>>>>>Is there a way to get xcreensaver to lock immediately? >>>>> >>>>> Maybe set it to lock (prompt for password)and zero minutes >>>>> perhaps. Otherwise one minute is the minimum, IIRC. >>>> >>>> xscreensaver-command -lock >>>> >>>> Easy to bind to a hot-key if one wishes. >>>> >>>> That's my method, anyway. Your "GUI" may have something you prefer. >>> >>> Interesting, never heard of xscreensaver-command before, "which >>> xscreensaver-command" comes up with zip, synaptic comes up with nada >>> for search results against "xscreensaver-command". >>> >>> I'm running LXDE on Debian jessie. What package is "xscreensaver- >>> command" part of, that it doesn't show up in synaptic search results? >> >> The xscreensaver package. >> Installs a bunch of xscreensaver* programs. >> >> man xscreensave shows 'em in the SEE ALSO section. > >Got it, much more convenient, thanks. https://www.jwz.org/xscreensaver/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 13:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <n6ud9l$p2$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186007 |
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote: > On Sun, 10 Jan 2016 06:44:42 -0700, crankypuss > <invalid@invalid.invalid> Gave us: > >>Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >> >>> crankypuss wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >>> >>>> Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>>> >>>>> DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote this copyrighted missive and >>>>> expects royalties: >>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, 09 Jan 2016 18:43:30 -0700, crankypuss >>>>>> <invalid@invalid.invalid> Gave us: >>>>>> >>>>>>>Is there a way to get xcreensaver to lock immediately? >>>>>> >>>>>> Maybe set it to lock (prompt for password)and zero minutes >>>>>> perhaps. Otherwise one minute is the minimum, IIRC. >>>>> >>>>> xscreensaver-command -lock >>>>> >>>>> Easy to bind to a hot-key if one wishes. >>>>> >>>>> That's my method, anyway. Your "GUI" may have something you >>>>> prefer. >>>> >>>> Interesting, never heard of xscreensaver-command before, "which >>>> xscreensaver-command" comes up with zip, synaptic comes up with >>>> nada for search results against "xscreensaver-command". >>>> >>>> I'm running LXDE on Debian jessie. What package is "xscreensaver- >>>> command" part of, that it doesn't show up in synaptic search >>>> results? >>> >>> The xscreensaver package. >>> Installs a bunch of xscreensaver* programs. >>> >>> man xscreensave shows 'em in the SEE ALSO section. >> >>Got it, much more convenient, thanks. > > > https://www.jwz.org/xscreensaver/ Thanks, I'll remember exactly that string of 30 or so characters. It's a potentially interesting site, knowing that it exists I'll probably go back and explore it sometime... nah, unlikely, I'm much more likely to get interested in qingy and lose all track of time in the midst of directFB or some X app that I can trace back to the X equivalent of the framebuffer. Still lots to learn and do, ATM what I'm doing is avoiding the rest of the UEFI spec (during breaks from shoveling snow). <g> -- http://totally-portable-software.blogspot.com [Sun Nov 22: "Total Portability is not binary"]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 08:52 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <20160110085259.69cae8f2@wizardstower.lan> |
| In reply to | #185972 |
On Sun, 10 Jan 2016 05:09:50 -0700 crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote: > Interesting, never heard of xscreensaver-command before, "which > xscreensaver-command" comes up with zip, synaptic comes up with nada > for search results against "xscreensaver-command". > > I'm running LXDE on Debian jessie. What package is "xscreensaver- > command" part of, that it doesn't show up in synaptic search results? man xscreensaver Cybe R. Wizard -- Registered GNU/Linux user # 126326 Registered Ubuntu User (deprecated) # 2136
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 08:27 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <j8KdneqRPJD0Gw_LnZ2dnUU7-T-dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #185972 |
On 2016-01-10, crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote: > I'm running LXDE on Debian jessie. What package is "xscreensaver- > command" part of, that it doesn't show up in synaptic search results? This is one area where I still feel like apt / dpkg still lags behind rpm / yum. The query system is not as good. with rpm I can determine which package owns a command... $ rpm -qf $(which vim) vim-enhanced-7.4.160-1.el7.x86_64 And I can get package info on the package that owns the command: $ rpm -qi $(rpm -qf $(which vim)) Name : vim-enhanced Epoch : 2 Version : 7.4.160 Release : 1.el7 Architecture: x86_64 Install Date: Sat 24 Oct 2015 08:54:08 AM PDT Group : Applications/Editors Size : 2292114 License : Vim Signature : RSA/SHA256, Thu 03 Jul 2014 10:41:13 PM PDT, Key ID 24c6a8a7f4a80eb5 Source RPM : vim-7.4.160-1.el7.src.rpm Build Date : Mon 09 Jun 2014 11:56:27 PM PDT Build Host : worker1.bsys.centos.org Relocations : (not relocatable) Packager : CentOS BuildSystem <http://bugs.centos.org> Vendor : CentOS URL : http://www.vim.org/ Summary : A version of the VIM editor which includes recent enhancements Description : VIM (VIsual editor iMproved) is an updated and improved version of the vi editor. Vi was the first real screen-based editor for UNIX, and is still very popular. VIM improves on vi by adding new features: multiple windows, multi-level undo, block highlighting and more. The vim-enhanced package contains a version of VIM with extra, recently introduced features like Python and Perl interpreters. Install the vim-enhanced package if you'd like to use a version of the VIM editor which includes recently added enhancements like interpreters for the Python and Perl scripting languages. You'll also need to install the vim-common package. In Debian you could install a tool called, dlocate.... $ sudo apt-get install dlocate Now search for packages that have a match for the command string: $ dlocate -S $(which vim) vim: /usr/bin/vim.basic vim-gnome: /usr/bin/vim.gnome vim-runtime: /usr/bin/vimtutor vim-tiny: /usr/bin/vim.tiny Now show package info on these candidates. $ apt-cache show vim Package: vim Priority: optional Section: editors Installed-Size: 2388 Maintainer: Ubuntu Developers <ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com> Original-Maintainer: Debian Vim Maintainers <pkg-vim-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org> Architecture: amd64 Version: 2:7.4.712-2ubuntu4 Provides: editor Depends: vim-common (= 2:7.4.712-2ubuntu4), vim-runtime (= 2:7.4.712-2ubuntu4), libacl1 (>= 2.2.51-8), libc6 (>= 2.15), libgpm2 (>= 1.20.4), libpython2.7 (>= 2.7), libselinux1 (>= 1.32), libtinfo5 Suggests: ctags, vim-doc, vim-scripts Filename: pool/main/v/vim/vim_7.4.712-2ubuntu4_amd64.deb Size: 1027872 MD5sum: b4c1b4a4caa584cd4229c0015151e84f SHA1: 85e8cd80c792030e7fc4e8e6427b58ea2458975f SHA256: ee955856d67f63001c3d1789ceab6efdb6331ae494af51e8346344063cd08119 Description-en: Vi IMproved - enhanced vi editor Vim is an almost compatible version of the UNIX editor Vi. . Many new features have been added: multi level undo, syntax highlighting, command line history, on-line help, filename completion, block operations, folding, Unicode support, etc. . This package contains a version of vim compiled with a rather standard set of features. This package does not provide a GUI version of Vim. See the other vim-* packages if you need more (or less). Description-md5: 59e8b8f7757db8b53566d5d119872de8 Homepage: http://www.vim.org/ Bugs: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+filebug Origin: Ubuntu Supported: 9m Task: ubuntu-usb, cloud-image, server, edubuntu-desktop-gnome, edubuntu-usb -- Marek Novotny https://github.com/marek-novotny
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 11:03 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <87twmlpdt2.fsf@thumper.dhh.gt.org> |
| In reply to | #185997 |
Marek writes: > This is one area where I still feel like apt / dpkg still lags behind > rpm / yum. The query system is not as good. > with rpm I can determine which package owns a command... man dpkg-query -- John Hasler jhasler@newsguy.com Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 12:25 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n6u40i$qul$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #185997 |
Marek Novotny wrote: > On 2016-01-10, crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote: >> I'm running LXDE on Debian jessie. What package is "xscreensaver- >> command" part of, that it doesn't show up in synaptic search results? > > This is one area where I still feel like apt / dpkg still lags behind > rpm / yum. The query system is not as good. > > with rpm I can determine which package owns a command... > > $ rpm -qf $(which vim) > vim-enhanced-7.4.160-1.el7.x86_64 > > And I can get package info on the package that owns the command: > > $ rpm -qi $(rpm -qf $(which vim)) > Name : vim-enhanced > Epoch : 2 > Version : 7.4.160 > Release : 1.el7 > Architecture: x86_64 > Install Date: Sat 24 Oct 2015 08:54:08 AM PDT > Group : Applications/Editors > Size : 2292114 > License : Vim > Signature : RSA/SHA256, Thu 03 Jul 2014 10:41:13 PM PDT, Key ID > 24c6a8a7f4a80eb5 > Source RPM : vim-7.4.160-1.el7.src.rpm > Build Date : Mon 09 Jun 2014 11:56:27 PM PDT > Build Host : worker1.bsys.centos.org > Relocations : (not relocatable) > Packager : CentOS BuildSystem <http://bugs.centos.org> > Vendor : CentOS > URL : http://www.vim.org/ > Summary : A version of the VIM editor which includes recent > enhancements > Description : > VIM (VIsual editor iMproved) is an updated and improved version of the > vi editor. Vi was the first real screen-based editor for UNIX, and is > still very popular. VIM improves on vi by adding new features: > multiple windows, multi-level undo, block highlighting and more. The > vim-enhanced package contains a version of VIM with extra, recently > introduced features like Python and Perl interpreters. > > Install the vim-enhanced package if you'd like to use a version of the > VIM editor which includes recently added enhancements like > interpreters for the Python and Perl scripting languages. You'll also > need to install the vim-common package. > > In Debian you could install a tool called, dlocate.... > > $ sudo apt-get install dlocate > > Now search for packages that have a match for the command string: > > $ dlocate -S $(which vim) > vim: /usr/bin/vim.basic > vim-gnome: /usr/bin/vim.gnome > vim-runtime: /usr/bin/vimtutor > vim-tiny: /usr/bin/vim.tiny > > Now show package info on these candidates. > > $ apt-cache show vim > Package: vim > Priority: optional > Section: editors > Installed-Size: 2388 > Maintainer: Ubuntu Developers <ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com> > Original-Maintainer: Debian Vim Maintainers > <pkg-vim-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org> > Architecture: amd64 > Version: 2:7.4.712-2ubuntu4 > Provides: editor > Depends: vim-common (= 2:7.4.712-2ubuntu4), vim-runtime (= > 2:7.4.712-2ubuntu4), libacl1 (>= 2.2.51-8), libc6 (>= 2.15), libgpm2 (>= > 1.20.4), libpython2.7 (>= 2.7), libselinux1 (>= 1.32), libtinfo5 > Suggests: ctags, vim-doc, vim-scripts > Filename: pool/main/v/vim/vim_7.4.712-2ubuntu4_amd64.deb > Size: 1027872 > MD5sum: b4c1b4a4caa584cd4229c0015151e84f > SHA1: 85e8cd80c792030e7fc4e8e6427b58ea2458975f > SHA256: ee955856d67f63001c3d1789ceab6efdb6331ae494af51e8346344063cd08119 > Description-en: Vi IMproved - enhanced vi editor > Vim is an almost compatible version of the UNIX editor Vi. > . > Many new features have been added: multi level undo, syntax > highlighting, command line history, on-line help, filename > completion, block operations, folding, Unicode support, etc. > . > This package contains a version of vim compiled with a rather > standard set of features. This package does not provide a GUI > version of Vim. See the other vim-* packages if you need more > (or less). > Description-md5: 59e8b8f7757db8b53566d5d119872de8 > Homepage: http://www.vim.org/ > Bugs: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+filebug > Origin: Ubuntu > Supported: 9m > Task: ubuntu-usb, cloud-image, server, edubuntu-desktop-gnome, > edubuntu-usb > I don't have vim install but other than RH adding more options to a single command versus Debian having difference commands for different options how is this not just another way to do it? dpkg -S $(which seamonkey) diversion by seamonkey-mozilla-build from: /usr/bin/seamonkey diversion by seamonkey-mozilla-build to: /usr/bin/seamonkey.ubuntu seamonkey-mozilla-build: /usr/bin/seamonkey -- Take care, Jonathan ------------------- LITTLE WORKS STUDIO http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 15:13 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <dqadndEt98IUeA_LnZ2dnUVZ5qWdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #186001 |
On 2016-01-10, Jonathan N. Little <lws4art@gmail.com> wrote: > Marek Novotny wrote: >> $ rpm -qi $(rpm -qf $(which vim)) >> Name : vim-enhanced >> Epoch : 2 >> Version : 7.4.160 >> Release : 1.el7 >> Architecture: x86_64 >> Install Date: Sat 24 Oct 2015 08:54:08 AM PDT >> Group : Applications/Editors >> Size : 2292114 >> License : Vim >> Signature : RSA/SHA256, Thu 03 Jul 2014 10:41:13 PM PDT, Key ID >> 24c6a8a7f4a80eb5 >> Source RPM : vim-7.4.160-1.el7.src.rpm >> Build Date : Mon 09 Jun 2014 11:56:27 PM PDT >> Build Host : worker1.bsys.centos.org >> Relocations : (not relocatable) >> Packager : CentOS BuildSystem <http://bugs.centos.org> >> Vendor : CentOS >> URL : http://www.vim.org/ >> Summary : A version of the VIM editor which includes recent > > I don't have vim install but other than RH adding more options to a > single command versus Debian having difference commands for different > options how is this not just another way to do it? The difference is I don't actually see a way to do the same thing with Debian based systems whether it be with one command or two. In the example above rhel/centos determined the exact package that owns the command. Not a list of packages that that share the common command. I just used vim as an example, but this is for virtually anything I can see in the installation of an application. > dpkg -S $(which seamonkey) > diversion by seamonkey-mozilla-build from: /usr/bin/seamonkey > diversion by seamonkey-mozilla-build to: /usr/bin/seamonkey.ubuntu > seamonkey-mozilla-build: /usr/bin/seamonkey I tried that with vim and it didn't work for someone reason. It's similar, but I'll opine rpm / yum does this with a little better precision. -- Marek Novotny https://github.com/marek-novotny
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 17:29 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <87d1t9ovy0.fsf@thumper.dhh.gt.org> |
| In reply to | #186023 |
Marek writes: > The difference is I don't actually see a way to do the same thing with > Debian based systems whether it be with one command or two. In the > example above rhel/centos determined the exact package that owns the > command. Not a list of packages that that share the common command. Debian packages don't own commands. -- John Hasler jhasler@newsguy.com Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 18:31 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n6upf9$h8k$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186023 |
Marek Novotny wrote:
> On 2016-01-10, Jonathan N. Little <lws4art@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I don't have vim install but other than RH adding more options to a
>> single command versus Debian having difference commands for different
>> options how is this not just another way to do it?
>
> The difference is I don't actually see a way to do the same thing with
> Debian based systems whether it be with one command or two. In the
> example above rhel/centos determined the exact package that owns the
> command. Not a list of packages that that share the common command. I
> just used vim as an example, but this is for virtually anything I can
> see in the installation of an application.
>
>> dpkg -S $(which seamonkey)
>> diversion by seamonkey-mozilla-build from: /usr/bin/seamonkey
>> diversion by seamonkey-mozilla-build to: /usr/bin/seamonkey.ubuntu
>> seamonkey-mozilla-build: /usr/bin/seamonkey
That is exactly what the above just did for seamonkey.
I parse the path of the executable to the search parameter
which seamonkey
/usr/bin/seamonkey
so the seamonkey command is in the seamonkey-mozilla-build package
apt-cache policy seamonkey-mozilla-build
seamonkey-mozilla-build:
Installed: 2.39-0ubuntu1
Candidate: 2.39-0ubuntu1
Version table:
*** 2.39-0ubuntu1 0
500
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/project/ubuntuzilla/mozilla/apt/
all/main amd64 Packages
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
>
> I tried that with vim and it didn't work for someone reason.
I don't have vim installed which is why I used seamonkey, which was a
good demo since the executable was not the same as the package.
>
> It's similar, but I'll opine rpm / yum does this with a little better
> precision.
>
Don't see it.
--
Take care,
Jonathanecho
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-11 03:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <n701q0$icg$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186023 |
Marek Novotny wrote: > On 2016-01-10, Jonathan N. Little <lws4art@gmail.com> wrote: >> Marek Novotny wrote: >>> $ rpm -qi $(rpm -qf $(which vim)) >>> Name : vim-enhanced >>> Epoch : 2 >>> Version : 7.4.160 >>> Release : 1.el7 >>> Architecture: x86_64 >>> Install Date: Sat 24 Oct 2015 08:54:08 AM PDT >>> Group : Applications/Editors >>> Size : 2292114 >>> License : Vim >>> Signature : RSA/SHA256, Thu 03 Jul 2014 10:41:13 PM PDT, Key ID >>> 24c6a8a7f4a80eb5 >>> Source RPM : vim-7.4.160-1.el7.src.rpm >>> Build Date : Mon 09 Jun 2014 11:56:27 PM PDT >>> Build Host : worker1.bsys.centos.org >>> Relocations : (not relocatable) >>> Packager : CentOS BuildSystem <http://bugs.centos.org> >>> Vendor : CentOS >>> URL : http://www.vim.org/ >>> Summary : A version of the VIM editor which includes recent >> >> I don't have vim install but other than RH adding more options to a >> single command versus Debian having difference commands for different >> options how is this not just another way to do it? > > The difference is I don't actually see a way to do the same thing with > Debian based systems whether it be with one command or two. In the > example above rhel/centos determined the exact package that owns the > command. Not a list of packages that that share the common command. I > just used vim as an example, but this is for virtually anything I can > see in the installation of an application. > >> dpkg -S $(which seamonkey) >> diversion by seamonkey-mozilla-build from: /usr/bin/seamonkey >> diversion by seamonkey-mozilla-build to: /usr/bin/seamonkey.ubuntu >> seamonkey-mozilla-build: /usr/bin/seamonkey > > I tried that with vim and it didn't work for someone reason. > > It's similar, but I'll opine rpm / yum does this with a little better > precision. OMG, this stuff is so '80s. Time to start playing catch-up, imo. -- http://totally-portable-software.blogspot.com [Sun Nov 22: "Total Portability is not binary"]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-11 08:11 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <87y4bwnr33.fsf@thumper.dhh.gt.org> |
| In reply to | #186051 |
crankypuss writes: > OMG, this stuff is so '80s. Time to start playing catch-up, imo. Because it's about command line stuff? You can use Synaptic or one of the other pointy-clicky "apps". Try something based on packagekit. It drags in dbus and libsystemd. Surely that's up-to-date. -- John Hasler jhasler@newsguy.com Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-11 10:22 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n70ha8$e2g$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186056 |
John Hasler wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > crankypuss writes: >> OMG, this stuff is so '80s. Time to start playing catch-up, imo. > > Because it's about command line stuff? You can use Synaptic or one of > the other pointy-clicky "apps". Try something based on packagekit. It > drags in dbus and libsystemd. Surely that's up-to-date. Many people mistake their limited experience with the totality of "the product". Of course, trolls push the idea that Linux is "80's" technology... no matter how much new stuff has come down the pike since then. -- Love is in the offing. Be affectionate to one who adores you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-11 10:32 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n70hq1$gvd$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186058 |
Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > John Hasler wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > >> crankypuss writes: >>> OMG, this stuff is so '80s. Time to start playing catch-up, imo. >> >> Because it's about command line stuff? You can use Synaptic or one of >> the other pointy-clicky "apps". Try something based on packagekit. It >> drags in dbus and libsystemd. Surely that's up-to-date. > > Many people mistake their limited experience with the totality of "the > product". > > Of course, trolls push the idea that Linux is "80's" technology... > no matter how much new stuff has come down the pike since then. > The command line can be so much more efficient. I can manage 2 dozen workstations remotely via ssh & command line in a totally for a few minutes, whereas to physically traverse each to do a Windows pointy-clicky on each (Or spend $$ for some proprietary software the other Windows-way) to do the same? No thanks! -- Take care, Jonathan ------------------- LITTLE WORKS STUDIO http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-11 08:44 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <obCdnd5zWNFiRg7LnZ2dnUU7-S2dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #186060 |
On 2016-01-11, Jonathan N. Little <lws4art@gmail.com> wrote: > Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >> John Hasler wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >> >>> crankypuss writes: >>>> OMG, this stuff is so '80s. Time to start playing catch-up, imo. >>> >>> Because it's about command line stuff? You can use Synaptic or one of >>> the other pointy-clicky "apps". Try something based on packagekit. It >>> drags in dbus and libsystemd. Surely that's up-to-date. >> >> Many people mistake their limited experience with the totality of "the >> product". >> >> Of course, trolls push the idea that Linux is "80's" technology... >> no matter how much new stuff has come down the pike since then. >> > > The command line can be so much more efficient. I can manage 2 dozen > workstations remotely via ssh & command line in a totally for a few > minutes, whereas to physically traverse each to do a Windows > pointy-clicky on each (Or spend $$ for some proprietary software the > other Windows-way) to do the same? No thanks! I was just reading a little about Microsoft's PowerShell. I attempted to learn a little PowerShell before learning a little BASH shell. Sorry I didn't save a link to the article. Just one of things I read in passing and didn't think I'd ever reference it. Anyway, in the article two key things were mentioned. 1. PowerShell users are discovering that using a shell is a lot better for administration tasks. So they start to use the shell and they start getting better and better at it. As they get better at it they start to rely on it more and more. 2. The article suggests that some of these admins have become so devoted to the shell that they are now looking at Linux from a new point of view and considering switching simple because they are starting to learn the BASH shell and like it better. I've opine'd over two years ago and still hold the same opinion today. Learning the shell changes everything. It puts you much more in the driver's seat than ever before. Previously I was a user who always relied on finding a tool that did what I wanted. If it wasn't built in, I'd look for a simple tool someone else made to do the task I wanted done. I think that describes the average Mac and PC user. And this is somehow a modern thing. Learning the shell means you not only understand the OS on a more fundamental level, but you can leverage the shell to do whatever you need. The shell becomes a universal utility. And it can do much more. Heck I wrote a lame Lemonade game in BASH. It's pretty flexible. I don't know how anyone can say it is so 80's. Especially coming from a self-described programmer. You either require that someone else built a tool or interface for you, or you're capable of crafting something you can use for yourself. I'd rather be the latter. If being able to think for yourself is so 80's then I opine we need a lot more 80's thinking. -- Marek Novotny https://github.com/marek-novotny
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-11 16:51 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <87a8oc2h5o.fsf@mantic.terraraq.uk> |
| In reply to | #186067 |
Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> writes: > The shell becomes a universal utility. And it can do much more. Heck I > wrote a lame Lemonade game in BASH. It's pretty flexible. I don't know > how anyone can say it is so 80's. Quite so. It’s a 1970s design at heart. > Especially coming from a self-described programmer. You either require > that someone else built a tool or interface for you, or you're capable > of crafting something you can use for yourself. I'd rather be the > latter. If being able to think for yourself is so 80's then I opine we > need a lot more 80's thinking. It has its place but (as it would be for any language), “universal” is overselling it. -- http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-12 04:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <n72na4$s7j$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186067 |
Marek Novotny wrote: > On 2016-01-11, Jonathan N. Little <lws4art@gmail.com> wrote: >> Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>> John Hasler wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >>> >>>> crankypuss writes: >>>>> OMG, this stuff is so '80s. Time to start playing catch-up, imo. >>>> >>>> Because it's about command line stuff? You can use Synaptic or one >>>> of >>>> the other pointy-clicky "apps". Try something based on packagekit. >>>> It >>>> drags in dbus and libsystemd. Surely that's up-to-date. >>> >>> Many people mistake their limited experience with the totality of >>> "the product". >>> >>> Of course, trolls push the idea that Linux is "80's" technology... >>> no matter how much new stuff has come down the pike since then. >>> >> >> The command line can be so much more efficient. I can manage 2 dozen >> workstations remotely via ssh & command line in a totally for a few >> minutes, whereas to physically traverse each to do a Windows >> pointy-clicky on each (Or spend $$ for some proprietary software the >> other Windows-way) to do the same? No thanks! > > I was just reading a little about Microsoft's PowerShell. I attempted > to learn a little PowerShell before learning a little BASH shell. > Sorry I didn't save a link to the article. Just one of things I read > in passing and didn't think I'd ever reference it. Anyway, in the > article two key things were mentioned. > > 1. PowerShell users are discovering that using a shell is a lot better > for administration tasks. So they start to use the shell and they > start getting better and better at it. As they get better at it they > start to rely on it more and more. > > 2. The article suggests that some of these admins have become so > devoted to the shell that they are now looking at Linux from a new > point of view and considering switching simple because they are > starting to learn the BASH shell and like it better. > > I've opine'd over two years ago and still hold the same opinion today. > Learning the shell changes everything. It puts you much more in the > driver's seat than ever before. Previously I was a user who always > relied on finding a tool that did what I wanted. If it wasn't built > in, I'd look for a simple tool someone else made to do the task I > wanted done. I think that describes the average Mac and PC user. And > this is somehow a modern thing. Learning the shell means you not only > understand the OS on a more fundamental level, but you can leverage > the shell to do whatever you need. > > The shell becomes a universal utility. And it can do much more. Heck I > wrote a lame Lemonade game in BASH. It's pretty flexible. I don't know > how anyone can say it is so 80's. Especially coming from a > self-described programmer. You either require that someone else built > a tool or interface for you, or you're capable of crafting something > you can use for yourself. I'd rather be the latter. If being able to > think for yourself is so 80's then I opine we need a lot more 80's > thinking. A lot of things have gone wrong since the '80s. That doesn't matter, we're not in the '80s anymore. Think about what you're really saying. You're saying that having a programmable environment to work in lets you get more work done faster and easier. Well duh, of course it does, that's why people bother to learn programming, it's what general-purpose computing systems are for, being programmable labor-saving devices, devices that help us do things we'd be unable to do without a machine to remember things for us, connections of this to that, ways to manipulate those connections to do actual work. You seem to think I'm ranting against using text commands. That's messed up. I'll rant against a BAD SET of text commands, that are parsed and implemented willy-nilly, but I also rant against lame-assed GUI systems because they are insufficiently programmable. Text-based commands are no more and no less than function-calls. The linux language uses inconsistent argument parsing and interpretation based on whatever the implementor was in the mood for, it's an ad-hoc system and hasn't advertised itself as anything else, regardless of what some companies have advertised. You People seem not to have a clue what I'm talking about. I'm tempted to say "no great loss" but it *is* a great loss. -- http://totally-portable-software.blogspot.com [Sun Nov 22: "Total Portability is not binary"]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-12 08:14 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n72u6i$o0a$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186103 |
Parochial crankypuss wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > Text-based commands are no more and no less than function-calls. The > linux language Ain't no such thing. > uses inconsistent argument parsing and interpretation > based on whatever the implementor was in the mood for, it's an ad-hoc > system and hasn't advertised itself as anything else, regardless of what > some companies have advertised. > > You People seem not to have a clue what I'm talking about. I'm tempted > to say "no great loss" but it *is* a great loss. No it isn't. But if it is for you, why don't you create another standard and get people to adhere to it? <rolls eyes> Say, maybe your game is Microsoft's PowerShell! Consistent, but tied to Microsoft's view of what a shell should do. -- Live in a world of your own, but always welcome visitors.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-12 07:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <n730rm$3l4$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186110 |
Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > Parochial crankypuss wrote this copyrighted missive and expects > royalties: > >> Text-based commands are no more and no less than function-calls. The >> linux language > > Ain't no such thing. Yeah, there is, you just aren't looking at it. Take every linux command you can issue. The name of the command is the function verb. The arguments and options are... duh, the arguments and options. That constitutes a language if you use it as one. What do you think bash is, anyway? It's just a half-assed interactive development environment. >> uses inconsistent argument parsing and interpretation >> based on whatever the implementor was in the mood for, it's an ad-hoc >> system and hasn't advertised itself as anything else, regardless of >> what some companies have advertised. >> >> You People seem not to have a clue what I'm talking about. I'm >> tempted to say "no great loss" but it *is* a great loss. > > No it isn't. But if it is for you, why don't you create another > standard and get people to adhere to it? <rolls eyes> > > Say, maybe your game is Microsoft's PowerShell! Consistent, but tied > to Microsoft's view of what a shell should do. Let me know if you get a clue about anything other than Ancient Lore, maybe you could help write some code. Oh wait, your masters have other uses for your life, which you're selling them much too cheaply. -- http://totally-portable-software.blogspot.com [Sun Nov 22: "Total Portability is not binary"]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-12 09:43 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n733cs$cuv$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186112 |
crankypuss wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > Take a Midol. -- And do you think (fop that I am) that I could be the Scarlet Pumpernickel?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 12 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.os.linux.ubuntu
csiph-web