Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.os.linux.ubuntu > #186474 > unrolled thread
| Started by | philo <philo@privacy.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-01-22 05:47 -0600 |
| Last post | 2016-01-25 04:10 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 70 — 14 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.os.linux.ubuntu
GUI "crash" philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-22 05:47 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 09:17 -0500
Re: GUI "crash" philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-22 08:27 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 10:53 -0500
Re: GUI "crash" philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-22 10:18 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-01-22 07:19 -0800
Re: GUI "crash" "Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl> - 2016-01-22 16:52 +0100
Re: GUI "crash" "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 10:57 -0500
Re: GUI "crash" philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-22 10:25 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-22 10:24 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" Edmund <nomail@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-22 15:30 +0000
Re: GUI "crash" "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 11:02 -0500
Re: GUI "crash" Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2016-01-22 17:22 +0100
Re: GUI "crash" DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-22 11:32 -0500
Re: GUI "crash" "Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl> - 2016-01-22 19:46 +0100
Re: GUI "crash" "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 12:01 -0500
Re: GUI "crash" philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-22 10:29 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" "Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl> - 2016-01-22 19:47 +0100
Re: GUI "crash" philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-22 12:58 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" mike antipasto <pizzadude@mycomputerrox.org> - 2016-01-22 19:20 -0500
Re: GUI "crash" philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-22 18:29 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" mike antipasto <pizzadude@mycomputerrox.org> - 2016-01-22 20:42 -0500
Re: GUI "crash" philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-22 21:53 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" "Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl> - 2016-01-23 10:13 +0100
Re: GUI "crash" philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-23 06:23 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" "Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl> - 2016-01-23 16:40 +0100
Re: GUI "crash" philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-23 10:16 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-22 10:26 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-22 11:29 -0500
Re: GUI "crash" ray carter <ray@zianet.com> - 2016-01-22 15:47 +0000
Re: GUI "crash" philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-22 10:30 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" Probable solution philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-22 13:40 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" Probable solution "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-22 20:11 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" Probable solution philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-22 21:32 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" Probable solution Edmund <nomail@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-23 11:36 +0000
Re: GUI "crash" Probable solution philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-23 06:24 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-24 12:05 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 13:24 -0500
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-24 12:30 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-24 13:36 -0500
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer Catzilla <catzilla@pussyboss.invalid> - 2016-01-24 18:46 +0000
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer Edmund <nomail@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-24 19:18 +0000
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-24 13:56 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer "Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl> - 2016-01-24 21:52 +0100
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-24 14:58 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer "Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl> - 2016-01-24 23:03 +0100
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-24 17:23 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-24 18:11 -0500
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer Edmund <nomail@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-25 01:04 +0000
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-24 19:22 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer Edmund <nomail@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-25 08:39 +0000
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-25 04:33 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-24 23:06 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 00:15 -0500
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-24 23:42 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer Edmund <nomail@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-25 10:41 +0000
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-25 09:51 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-25 10:03 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-25 11:06 -0500
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-25 10:54 -0600
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-25 12:07 -0500
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-25 05:49 -0500
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-25 10:50 -0500
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-25 10:42 -0500
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-25 10:42 -0500
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-01-25 10:09 -0800
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer Edmund <nomail@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-26 09:00 +0000
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-26 05:26 -0500
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-24 18:09 -0500
Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer Dan C <youmustbejoking@lan.invalid> - 2016-01-25 04:10 +0000
Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 Next page →
| From | philo <philo@privacy.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-22 18:29 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n7uhcr$r5s$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186507 |
On 01/22/2016 06:20 PM, mike antipasto wrote: X X >> >> >> I don't want to chance it but may look into another file manager > > You should look into another operating system. > Desktop Linux is a disaster. > Already have done that... I have two main machines and a KVM switch. My main machine runs Linux and my 2nd machine Win7 I run them simultaneously and use each machine for what it does best. Linux is used almost 100% for email and accessing the web. The Windows machine is close to impossible to used on-line. No many how many pop-up and ad-ware blockers I try, the web pages load impossibly slow...Under Linux everything runs smooth and fast. In the 15 years I've been using Linux I've had few problems and if I do, I usually get a good answer pretty fast just by posting on Usenet.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mike antipasto <pizzadude@mycomputerrox.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-22 20:42 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n7ulla$6jf$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186508 |
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 18:29:53 -0600, philo wrote: > On 01/22/2016 06:20 PM, mike antipasto wrote: > X > X >>> >>> >>> I don't want to chance it but may look into another file manager >> >> You should look into another operating system. >> Desktop Linux is a disaster. >> > > > > Already have done that... > I have two main machines and a KVM switch. > > My main machine runs Linux and my 2nd machine Win7 Ok. > > I run them simultaneously and use each machine for what it does best. Good idea. > Linux is used almost 100% for email and accessing the web. Good application for Linux. > > The Windows machine is close to impossible to used on-line. No many how > many pop-up and ad-ware blockers I try, the web pages load impossibly > slow...Under Linux everything runs smooth and fast. I don't have those problems. Never have. What kind of sites are you visiting? I use Adblock with Chrome and Opera. > > In the 15 years I've been using Linux I've had few problems and if I do, > I usually get a good answer pretty fast just by posting on Usenet. Well I gave you one, VLC for your video/ avi corruption :) I'm not anti-Linux at all and in fact I run my home media server on Linux. However when it comes to mainstream applications, multimedia, support for things like tablets, smart phones, hardware and so forth, nothing comes close to Windows and especially in terms of applications. Context sensitive help is just one area where Linux fails. The truth is, Linux applications are like something out of the mid 90's. Take away the freedom factor and charge for Linux and zero people would be running Linux. Most of the people running Linux hate corporations, hate Microsoft, loath Apple and so forth. And they are willing to put up with half baked unstable user unfriendly Linux applications just so they can toss the middle finger at Microsoft. It's basically cutting off ones nose to spite ones face. As for support, take a look at this group as an example. It's pathetic. The people are nasty, ignorant and childish. Is this really the kind of support you want to depend upon? And you can extrapolate this to any Linux group. Same crazy people. Linux is great in theory but terrible in practice. Seriously. Unless you are some kind of command line junkie circa 1985 running Linux applications is a huge step in the wrong direction and ignoring their faults for the sake of freedom fighting is a losing battle. Why? Did you see that the FSF just sold out to corporations? Yep. They are abandoning the Linux community and following the money. Wonder how all the suckers who give away their software and time feel about that. http://www.itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/71148-linux-foundation- shows-it-backs-corporates-not-community http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/39546.html It's your choice, but just take a look at what photography applications are available for Windows or OSX vs Linux and honestly look at the features before deciding.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | philo <philo@privacy.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-22 21:53 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n7utaf$s3c$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186509 |
On 01/22/2016 07:42 PM, mike antipasto wrote: > >> The Windows machine is close to impossible to used on-line. No many how >> many pop-up and ad-ware blockers I try, the web pages load impossibly >> slow...Under Linux everything runs smooth and fast. > > I don't have those problems. > Never have. > What kind of sites are you visiting? > I use Adblock with Chrome and Opera. Mainly just Facebook. Either Firefox or Chrome. >> >> In the 15 years I've been using Linux I've had few problems and if I do, >> I usually get a good answer pretty fast just by posting on Usenet. > > Well I gave you one, VLC for your video/ avi corruption :) Yep that was damn good advice and VLC is an incredibly good application > > I'm not anti-Linux at all and in fact I run my home media server on Linux. > However when it comes to mainstream applications, multimedia, support for > things like tablets, smart phones, hardware and so forth, nothing comes > close to Windows and especially in terms of applications. > Context sensitive help is just one area where Linux fails. For quite some time I was using Linux for just about everything but have been scanning my old slides and negatives for the last three months. Though I can use Viewscan to get the slide/film scanning portion of my scanner working...using it with the actual Epson (Windows) drivers considerably reduces my workload. Like I said...I could care less what OS I use...so I use Windows and Linux and even own a few Macs. I was working 40 -60 hours a week for three full months scanning and organizing my photos and those of my father's going all the way back 1950. I got the attention of a fine arts dealer here in town and now at the age of 66 I can be considered a professional. WOW! > > The truth is, Linux applications are like something out of the mid 90's. > Take away the freedom factor and charge for Linux and zero people would be > running Linux. > > Most of the people running Linux hate corporations, hate Microsoft, loath > Apple and so forth. And they are willing to put up with half baked unstable > user unfriendly Linux applications just so they can toss the middle finger > at Microsoft. > > It's basically cutting off ones nose to spite ones face. > > As for support, take a look at this group as an example. It's pathetic. The > people are nasty, ignorant and childish. Is this really the kind of support > you want to depend upon? And you can extrapolate this to any Linux group. > Same crazy people. Actually I get great advice on Usenet. All I do is put the buffoons in the kill-file and that's that. > > Linux is great in theory but terrible in practice. Seriously. Unless you > are some kind of command line junkie circa 1985 running Linux applications > is a huge step in the wrong direction and ignoring their faults for the > sake of freedom fighting is a losing battle. Though I can use the command line I don't have to. In general I've found Linux to work well but don't stew on it if I need to use Windows...for example...to run my scanner. While I was doing the scanning it did go through my mind that...sheesh isn't it kind of silly for me to be using Linux? So while I was scanning on my Windows machine and between scans checking Facebook etc I did not at first see the need to turn on my Linux machine...but it just got too frustrating. > > Why? > > Did you see that the FSF just sold out to corporations? > Yep. > They are abandoning the Linux community and following the money. > Wonder how all the suckers who give away their software and time feel about > that. > I don't care anything about the politics behind operating system...all I want is something that works for me...and no one OS can do it all. > http://www.itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/71148-linux-foundation- > shows-it-backs-corporates-not-community > > http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/39546.html > > It's your choice, but just take a look at what photography applications are > available for Windows or OSX vs Linux and honestly look at the features > before deciding. > Once I have my photo scanned my philosophy to keep it simple. Since, like I said all I care about is "What's the simplest and easiest way for me to do my job?" I do not do extensive photo-editing. Most of my photography is unposed candids and I don't believe in doing much post-processing. Possibly converting a color image to grayscale...adjusting contrast and gamma a bit. Many years ago I purchased ACDsee 3.0 and still use it today. It works (in anything) better under WINE on Linux than it does on Windows. Since I have a lot of photos here, I can't spend all day working on them,,,and can probably have three images edited before Photoshop would even open.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-23 10:13 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <56a3443e$0$23801$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #186514 |
Op 23-01-16 om 04:53 write philo: > For quite some time I was using Linux for just about everything > but have been scanning my old slides and negatives for the last three > months. Though I can use Viewscan to get the slide/film scanning portion > of my scanner working...using it with the actual Epson (Windows) drivers > considerably reduces my workload. I have an Epson V600 that I use under Linux for both positives and negatives. To get most out of it I bought a licence to Hamrick's Vuescan and like it so much I even use it on the company's Windows computer :) It's not only what work flow you get used to, at the end of the day Linux (Kubuntu) is faster, more flexible and offers better reliability.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | philo <philo@privacy.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-23 06:23 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n7vr66$f7m$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186518 |
On 01/23/2016 03:13 AM, Dirk T. Verbeek wrote: > Op 23-01-16 om 04:53 write philo: >> For quite some time I was using Linux for just about everything >> but have been scanning my old slides and negatives for the last three >> months. Though I can use Viewscan to get the slide/film scanning portion >> of my scanner working...using it with the actual Epson (Windows) drivers >> considerably reduces my workload. > > I have an Epson V600 that I use under Linux for both positives and > negatives. > To get most out of it I bought a licence to Hamrick's Vuescan and like > it so much I even use it on the company's Windows computer :) > > It's not only what work flow you get used to, at the end of the day > Linux (Kubuntu) is faster, more flexible and offers better reliability. It's possible I did not give Vuescan a fair chance as I only used the trial version. If you scan two strips of negatives can you scan each frame into an individual jpg ? If so then it probably would have worked for me. Also with Viewscan what's the highest resolution you can scan at?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-23 16:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <56a39ed6$0$23792$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #186520 |
Op 23-01-16 om 13:23 schreef philo: >> I have an Epson V600 that I use under Linux for both positives and >> negatives. >> To get most out of it I bought a licence to Hamrick's Vuescan and like >> it so much I even use it on the company's Windows computer :) >> >> It's not only what work flow you get used to, at the end of the day >> Linux (Kubuntu) is faster, more flexible and offers better reliability. > > > > It's possible I did not give Vuescan a fair chance as I only used the > trial version. Except for the watermark it should work the same. 2011 I bought the life long updates version. A few months later there was a structural change in (K)Ubuntu 11.10 to where certain 64-bit libs were (/usr/lib/iscan) and Vuescan would no longer work. After a couple of mails and tests it was fixed. > > > If you scan two strips of negatives can you scan each frame into an > individual jpg ? If so then it probably would have worked for me. Yes each frame will become a separate jpg. You can set it to automatic or manual framing. The maximum strip size is 2x6 frames. > > > Also with Viewscan what's the highest resolution you can scan at? The highest this scanner can do is 6400, I've done a few at 4800 but that was over the resolution of the lens I used. Most are at 2400-3600. By modern standards it is not the prettiest application, it is business like and I find it easy to navigate. The frequent updates are easy to implement, unpack the .tgz and copy the content over the original files in ~/.vuescan. The trolls will claim us Linux and OSS users want everything for free but I'm happy to spend on good software, even if it is closed source like Vuescan.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | philo <philo@privacy.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-23 10:16 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n808rb$k6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186524 |
On 01/23/2016 09:40 AM, Dirk T. Verbeek wrote: > O > > 2011 I bought the life long updates version. > A few months later there was a structural change in (K)Ubuntu 11.10 to > where certain 64-bit libs were (/usr/lib/iscan) and Vuescan would no > longer work. > > After a couple of mails and tests it was fixed. >> >> >> If you scan two strips of negatives can you scan each frame into an >> individual jpg ? If so then it probably would have worked for me. > > Yes each frame will become a separate jpg. > You can set it to automatic or manual framing. > The maximum strip size is 2x6 frames. >> >> >> Also with Viewscan what's the highest resolution you can scan at? > > The highest this scanner can do is 6400, I've done a few at 4800 but > that was over the resolution of the lens I used. > Most are at 2400-3600. > > By modern standards it is not the prettiest application, it is business > like and I find it easy to navigate. > > The frequent updates are easy to implement, unpack the .tgz and copy the > content over the original files in ~/.vuescan. > > The trolls will claim us Linux and OSS users want everything for free > but I'm happy to spend on good software, even if it is closed source > like Vuescan. Thanks for the info...I certainly do not mind paying for things that work. Now that my scanning project is done though I'm not sure if it would now be worth it...but I better have a better look at the trial version thanks
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | philo <philo@privacy.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-22 10:26 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n7tl2s$7s7$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186481 |
On 01/22/2016 09:30 AM, Edmund wrote: > On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 05:47:14 -0600, philo wrote: > >> Using Ubuntu 15.10 (64bit) Dual core AMD / 8 gigs RAM and lower end >> nVidia. System has had zero problems until recently when organizing my >> extensive photo archives. I've been moving folders containing up to 500 >> or 600 jpgs. >> >> The moves have been 100% successful however Nautilus will often shut >> down in the process and I'm left with it either stalled or a complete >> blank desktop. Since I'm now mostly done organizing my data it's not l a >> major problem...but still I know that is absolutely incorrect behavior >> and I'd like to correct it. Any ideas? > > For starters I don't consider 600 jpgs anything near a extensive photo > collection. My cell phone alone can hold a lot more. > My experience with several file browsers is more or less the same, they > all fail when handling really large amounts of data. > I can say it seems to be a file-browser problem but in fact I really have > no idea what is causing these problems. > > Edmund > Correct, I have perhaps 50,000 images but don't keep any more than 600 or so in any one folder
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-22 11:29 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <22m4abtqg797p0ve6ajn084qb5oi05p73o@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #186481 |
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 15:30:30 -0000 (UTC), Edmund <nomail@hotmail.com> Gave us: >On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 05:47:14 -0600, philo wrote: > >> Using Ubuntu 15.10 (64bit) Dual core AMD / 8 gigs RAM and lower end >> nVidia. System has had zero problems until recently when organizing my >> extensive photo archives. I've been moving folders containing up to 500 >> or 600 jpgs. >> >> The moves have been 100% successful however Nautilus will often shut >> down in the process and I'm left with it either stalled or a complete >> blank desktop. Since I'm now mostly done organizing my data it's not l a >> major problem...but still I know that is absolutely incorrect behavior >> and I'd like to correct it. Any ideas? > >For starters I don't consider 600 jpgs anything near a extensive photo >collection. My cell phone alone can hold a lot more. >My experience with several file browsers is more or less the same, they >all fail when handling really large amounts of data. >I can say it seems to be a file-browser problem but in fact I really have >no idea what is causing these problems. > That is so much horseshit. An internet app is a "browser". File managers are file managers and they are meant to function with one's stored data. ALL of it, regardless of type or file size. They are not "browsers", ding dong. And apparently you fail when a large amount of facts is presented to you and start making shit up and guessing as you plod though life.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | ray carter <ray@zianet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-22 15:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <dgf192FdhlkU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #186474 |
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 05:47:14 -0600, philo wrote: > Using Ubuntu 15.10 (64bit) Dual core AMD / 8 gigs RAM and lower end > nVidia. System has had zero problems until recently when organizing my > extensive photo archives. I've been moving folders containing up to 500 > or 600 jpgs. > > The moves have been 100% successful however Nautilus will often shut > down in the process and I'm left with it either stalled or a complete > blank desktop. Since I'm now mostly done organizing my data it's not l a > major problem...but still I know that is absolutely incorrect behavior > and I'd like to correct it. Any ideas? Have you been moving the folders or moving all the files? To move a folder should be a simple one step operation.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | philo <philo@privacy.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-22 10:30 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n7tl9n$7s7$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186482 |
On 01/22/2016 09:47 AM, ray carter wrote: > On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 05:47:14 -0600, philo wrote: > >> Using Ubuntu 15.10 (64bit) Dual core AMD / 8 gigs RAM and lower end >> nVidia. System has had zero problems until recently when organizing my >> extensive photo archives. I've been moving folders containing up to 500 >> or 600 jpgs. >> >> The moves have been 100% successful however Nautilus will often shut >> down in the process and I'm left with it either stalled or a complete >> blank desktop. Since I'm now mostly done organizing my data it's not l a >> major problem...but still I know that is absolutely incorrect behavior >> and I'd like to correct it. Any ideas? > > Have you been moving the folders or moving all the files? To move a > folder should be a simple one step operation. > In some cases it was the entire folder and in some cases moving the contents of some folders to another.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | philo <philo@privacy.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-22 13:40 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: GUI "crash" Probable solution |
| Message-ID | <n7u0f1$ohl$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186474 |
Have not used in for many years but installed Xfe gave it a try and it seems to work fast and without a htich
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-22 20:11 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: GUI "crash" Probable solution |
| Message-ID | <20160122201136.1d1800e6@wizardstower.lan> |
| In reply to | #186502 |
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 13:40:55 -0600 philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote: > Have not used in for many years but installed Xfe > > gave it a try and it seems to work fast and without a htich While trying, try pcmanfm. It's been my choice for a while. Cybe R. Wizard -- Registered GNU/Linux user # 126326 Registered Ubuntu User (deprecated) # 2136
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | philo <philo@privacy.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-22 21:32 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: GUI "crash" Probable solution |
| Message-ID | <n7us3u$p60$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186510 |
On 01/22/2016 08:11 PM, Cybe R. Wizard wrote: > On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 13:40:55 -0600 > philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote: > >> Have not used in for many years but installed Xfe >> >> gave it a try and it seems to work fast and without a htich > > While trying, try pcmanfm. It's been my choice for a while. > > Cybe R. Wizard > Will give it a try if I have any more problems but looks ok now thanks
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Edmund <nomail@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-23 11:36 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: GUI "crash" Probable solution |
| Message-ID | <n7voja$al3$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186513 |
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:32:54 -0600, philo wrote: > On 01/22/2016 08:11 PM, Cybe R. Wizard wrote: >> On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 13:40:55 -0600 philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote: >> >>> Have not used in for many years but installed Xfe >>> >>> gave it a try and it seems to work fast and without a htich >> >> While trying, try pcmanfm. It's been my choice for a while. >> >> Cybe R. Wizard >> >> > > Will give it a try if I have any more problems but looks ok now thanks I have Xfe and tried all file browsers, they all fail in one way or another. Not much problems with small amounts of data. Edmund
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | philo <philo@privacy.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-23 06:24 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: GUI "crash" Probable solution |
| Message-ID | <n7vr92$f7m$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186519 |
On 01/23/2016 05:36 AM, Edmund wrote: > On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:32:54 -0600, philo wrote: > >> On 01/22/2016 08:11 PM, Cybe R. Wizard wrote: >>> On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 13:40:55 -0600 philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote: >>> >>>> Have not used in for many years but installed Xfe >>>> >>>> gave it a try and it seems to work fast and without a htich >>> >>> While trying, try pcmanfm. It's been my choice for a while. >>> >>> Cybe R. Wizard >>> >>> >> >> Will give it a try if I have any more problems but looks ok now thanks > > I have Xfe and tried all file browsers, they all fail in one way or > another. Not much problems with small amounts of data. > > Edmund > The problem I had seems to have been due to moving files while set to thumbnail view so I will avoid doing that no matter which file manager I use
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | philo <philo@privacy.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-24 12:05 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer |
| Message-ID | <n833jc$fgf$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186474 |
On 01/22/2016 05:47 AM, philo wrote: > Using Ubuntu 15.10 (64bit) Dual core AMD / 8 gigs RAM and lower end > nVidia. System has had zero problems until recently when organizing my > extensive photo archives. I've been moving folders containing up to 500 > or 600 jpgs. > > The moves have been 100% successful however Nautilus will often shut > down in the process and I'm left with it either stalled or a complete > blank desktop. Since I'm now mostly done organizing my data it's not l a > major problem...but still I know that is absolutely incorrect behavior > and I'd like to correct it. Any ideas? I did some more testing with Thumbnails disabled, then used Nautilus to copy about 1.2gigs of data, it still crashed. Tried Xfe and it worked very well, smooth and without a problem. Tried Xfe with thumbnails enabled and it did not work so hot. Bottom line is to use Xfe with thumbnails off when moving or copying data and to use Nautilus with thumbnails enable for simply viewing
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-24 13:24 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer |
| Message-ID | <n834no$k9c$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186555 |
philo wrote: > I did some more testing with Thumbnails disabled, then used Nautilus to > copy about 1.2gigs of data, it still crashed. > > Tried Xfe and it worked very well, smooth and without a problem. > > > > Tried Xfe with thumbnails enabled and it did not work so hot. > > > Bottom line is to use Xfe with thumbnails off when moving or copying data > > and to use Nautilus with thumbnails enable for simply viewing I think they just need to fix the bug. Moving or copying when data is images thumbnails is really handy and SHOULD be a viable option. Nautilus people fix the bug! -- Take care, Jonathan ------------------- LITTLE WORKS STUDIO http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | philo <philo@privacy.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-24 12:30 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer |
| Message-ID | <n8352i$lbf$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #186557 |
On 01/24/2016 12:24 PM, Jonathan N. Little wrote: > philo wrote: > >> I did some more testing with Thumbnails disabled, then used Nautilus to >> copy about 1.2gigs of data, it still crashed. >> >> Tried Xfe and it worked very well, smooth and without a problem. >> >> >> >> Tried Xfe with thumbnails enabled and it did not work so hot. >> >> >> Bottom line is to use Xfe with thumbnails off when moving or copying data >> >> and to use Nautilus with thumbnails enable for simply viewing > > I think they just need to fix the bug. Moving or copying when data is > images thumbnails is really handy and SHOULD be a viable option. > Nautilus people fix the bug! > Considering that Nautilus has been around for 15 years my guess is it's not going to get fixed.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-24 13:36 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: GUI "crash" Follow up and answer |
| Message-ID | <ba6aablclcposd1aeal3j4or6vs8tc6gga@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #186560 |
On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 12:30:17 -0600, philo <philo@privacy.net> Gave us: >On 01/24/2016 12:24 PM, Jonathan N. Little wrote: >> philo wrote: >> >>> I did some more testing with Thumbnails disabled, then used Nautilus to >>> copy about 1.2gigs of data, it still crashed. >>> >>> Tried Xfe and it worked very well, smooth and without a problem. >>> >>> >>> >>> Tried Xfe with thumbnails enabled and it did not work so hot. >>> >>> >>> Bottom line is to use Xfe with thumbnails off when moving or copying data >>> >>> and to use Nautilus with thumbnails enable for simply viewing >> >> I think they just need to fix the bug. Moving or copying when data is >> images thumbnails is really handy and SHOULD be a viable option. >> Nautilus people fix the bug! >> > > > >Considering that Nautilus has been around for 15 years my guess is it's >not going to get fixed. Have you even followed the thread? It is a problem with the thumbnail applet which gets called into play by the file MANGER. And we already know what credulity to assign to your guesses.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.os.linux.ubuntu
csiph-web