Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #266348 > unrolled thread

I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-01-21 06:40 +0100
    Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2024-01-21 07:40 +0100
      Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-01-21 13:10 +0100
    Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2024-01-21 08:20 +0100
      Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-01-21 14:30 +0100
    Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2024-01-21 10:30 +0100
      Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-01-21 14:40 +0100
    Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out Klaus Singvogel <deb-user-ml@singvogel.net> - 2024-01-21 11:30 +0100
      Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out Bret Busby <bret@busby.net> - 2024-01-21 11:40 +0100
        Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out Bret Busby <bret@busby.net> - 2024-01-21 11:40 +0100
          Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out Klaus Singvogel <deb-user-ml@singvogel.net> - 2024-01-21 16:20 +0100
            Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out John Hasler <john@sugarbit.com> - 2024-01-21 17:10 +0100
              Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out Klaus Singvogel <deb-user-ml@singvogel.net> - 2024-01-21 18:10 +0100
              Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-01-21 19:50 +0100
                Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out John Hasler <john@sugarbit.com> - 2024-01-21 20:30 +0100
                  Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-01-21 21:00 +0100
                    Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2024-01-21 21:10 +0100
                    chromium http://localhost:80 Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2024-01-22 16:20 +0100
                      Re: chromium http://localhost:80 gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-01-22 19:30 +0100
                    Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2024-01-23 05:10 +0100
                      Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-01-23 06:00 +0100
                        Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2024-01-23 13:40 +0100
                          Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-01-23 14:10 +0100
                          Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2024-01-23 14:20 +0100
            Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out Bret Busby <bret@busby.net> - 2024-01-21 19:20 +0100
              Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out Bret Busby <bret@busby.net> - 2024-01-21 20:00 +0100
            Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2024-01-21 19:40 +0100
              Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out fxkl47BF@protonmail.com - 2024-01-21 20:10 +0100
              Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out John Hasler <john@sugarbit.com> - 2024-01-21 20:30 +0100
              Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-01-21 20:30 +0100
                Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2024-01-21 21:00 +0100
                  Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-01-21 21:30 +0100
                    Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2024-01-21 21:40 +0100
                      Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-01-21 22:50 +0100
              Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2024-01-22 18:00 +0100
                Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-01-22 20:30 +0100
            Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-01-21 19:40 +0100
              Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-01-21 19:50 +0100
            Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-01-21 19:50 +0100
              Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out Bret Busby <bret@busby.net> - 2024-01-21 20:10 +0100
                Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out Bret Busby <bret@busby.net> - 2024-01-21 20:30 +0100
                  Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out Bret Busby <bret@busby.net> - 2024-01-21 20:40 +0100
            Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2024-01-21 19:50 +0100
        Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-01-21 11:50 +0100
          Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out Bret Busby <bret@busby.net> - 2024-01-21 19:00 +0100
    Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out Eike Lantzsch ZP5CGE / KY4PZ <zp6cge@gmx.net> - 2024-01-21 15:10 +0100
      Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-01-21 19:20 +0100
        Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2024-01-21 19:40 +0100
          Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-01-22 05:50 +0100
            Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out fxkl47BF@protonmail.com - 2024-01-23 13:10 +0100
              Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-01-23 13:50 +0100
        Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out Eike Lantzsch ZP5CGE / KY4PZ <zp6cge@gmx.net> - 2024-01-21 20:00 +0100
          Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-01-21 20:50 +0100
        Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2024-01-21 20:50 +0100
    Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out <hohe72@posteo.de> - 2024-02-05 23:00 +0100
      Re: I've an editable .pdf form I need to fill out ghe2001 <ghe2001@protonmail.com> - 2024-02-05 23:30 +0100

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#266496

On 1/22/24 23:05, David Wright wrote:
> On Sun 21 Jan 2024 at 14:50:59 (-0500), gene heskett wrote:
>> On 1/21/24 14:29, John Hasler wrote:
>>> Klaus writes:
>>>> Did you notice, that I was talking about the reduced, crippled OpenSource
>>>> browser: chromium
>>>
>>> I wrote:
>>>> In what way is it crippled?
>>>
>>> Gene writes:
>>>> Port 80 has been hijacked. You cannot send it to monitor your own web
>>>> page at http://localhost:80, but the result is a 403 because google
>>>> doesn't know WTH to do with localhost...
> 
> Why would that cause a permissions (403) error?
> 
>>> I just tried that. No hijacking: works fine.
>> It was also true here using the file:// prefix, trying look at the
>> html versions of the man pages in /usr/share/local/docs.
> 
> I don't understand why a file:// prefix would test whether port 80 worked.
> Port 80 is for http:// isn't it?
> 
>> Firefox-esr
>> can use that syntax just fine.
> 
> Which syntax, the one in your previous sentence or the one in your
> previous post?
> 
>> Where the difference be?
> 
> Between what and what? You never seem to quote what you actually
> put in the address bar together with what the outcome was.

which is why with my fading short term memory I generally copy/paste, 
including the bash prompts so you know its copy/paste but even then you 
question me. As for the file:// and :80, I'm not that forgetfull, I 
copy/pasted the rest of that files address from a previous ls output.
On pressing enter it went to a google search and of course did not find 
it, but a repeat into less worked (I hate trying to read html) and 
firefox-esr Just Worked.  As for armbian, in recent history it has used 
debian repo's or unbuntu jammie repos. I just rechecked, that one is 
running the arm64 version of Jammy so the chromium formerly installed 
came from jammy.

Take care, stay warm, dry and well
> 
> Cheers,
> David.
> 
> .

Cheers, Gene Heskett.
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
  soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
  - Louis D. Brandeis

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#266516

On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 11:51:30PM -0500, gene heskett wrote:
> which is why with my fading short term memory I generally copy/paste,
> including the bash prompts so you know its copy/paste but even then you
> question me. As for the file:// and :80, I'm not that forgetfull, I
> copy/pasted the rest of that files address from a previous ls output.

WHAT exactly did you have in the URL bar at the time you pressed Enter?

> On pressing enter it went to a google search and of course did not find it,

Without some kind of evidence, I am just going to conclude that you
made a mistake.

For example, if I type the word "file", then a space, then paste an
absolute pathname, I get a search result page.

If I do certain other kinds of mangling, like "file://" and then a
space, and then a pasted absolute path, Chrome tries to find a similar
previous item in the URL bar history, and uses that when I press Enter.
So, the result in this case is dependent upon my previous manglings,
and cannot be predicted in a vacuum.  If there's a way to make Chrome
treat each mangled query as an "ab initio" request, bypassing its
history, I don't know it.

Also from the "weird results" category: if I mangle the URL by using
two slashes instead of three, Chrome appears to treat that as a
relative pathname, attempts to open usr/share/whatever instead of
/usr/share/whatever, fails, and gives me an error page.  However, if I
mangle the URL by using *one* slash instead of three, it treats that
as if I had used all three slashes, and I get the document.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#266518

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 07:30:49AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote:

[...]

> Also from the "weird results" category: if I mangle the URL by using
> two slashes instead of three, Chrome appears to treat that as a
> relative pathname, attempts to open usr/share/whatever instead of
> /usr/share/whatever, fails, and gives me an error page.  However, if I
> mangle the URL by using *one* slash instead of three, it treats that
> as if I had used all three slashes, and I get the document.

I'm a sucker for Google bashing myself (there are more than enough
reasons to bash them, mind you), but this weirdness you describe
is built into the URL syntax [1].

When there are two slashes, they belong to the so-called "authority"
part (think host+port in HTTP URLs). Since file: doesn't have that
(it's always empty) whatever comes after file:// is the path. One
more slash and you have an absolute path. No slash after that, and
you have a relative path.

The one-slash-alone is interpreted as "no authority part" (it is
optional) and the path starts with /, so, again, absolute.

No slashes at all should be, again, relative (I never tried to find
out wrt what, possibly the browser's CWD, but who knows).

The whole Internet after mid to late 90ies is a horror story. That's
what happens when people grab the designs before giving designers
time to think over things. What I call no-backtracking design.

Cheers

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/URL
-- 
t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#266519

On 23/01/2024 19:30, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> Also from the "weird results" category: if I mangle the URL by using
> two slashes instead of three, Chrome appears to treat that as a
> relative pathname, attempts to open usr/share/whatever instead of
> /usr/share/whatever, fails, and gives me an error page.

Formally with 2 slashes it might be treated file://hostname/path
https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Specifications/file-uri-spec/
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1738#section-3.10

Qt (unrelated to chromium) might do some funny things with the component 
after 2 slashes for arbitrary protocols, e.g. to downcase it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#266394

On 21/1/24 23:12, Klaus Singvogel wrote:
> Bret Busby wrote:
>> On 21/1/24 18:36, Bret Busby wrote:
>>> On 21/1/24 18:16, Klaus Singvogel wrote:
>>>>
>>>> If the PDF is editable (has the option to fill out the blanks), I
>>>> use often chromium.
>>>>
> [...]
>>> My understanding of the nature of chromium, is that it retrieves all the
>>> data that is input to chromium, and onsells it.
>>>
>>> chroming is dangerous.
> 
>> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-01-18/chrome-incognito-mode-privacy-warning-change/103361328
> 
> Did you notice, that I was talking about the reduced, crippled OpenSource browser: chromium, which is based on chrome. But I was not talking about the chrome itself.
> 
> AFAIK are these Google related parts removed in chromium; at least they were several years ago.
> 
> Best regards,
Ah.

Then, perhaps, the open source derivative should have been named 
something else, for example, Wolfram, which is in the same group as 
chromium, to be not confused with chrome.

I note that  the name iceape is sufficiently different to seamonkey, and 
iceweasel sufficiently different to firefox, to not be confused with the 
original.

Similarly with icecat and burningdog -

" The name “IceCat” was coined to show our relationship to the Mozilla 
Firefox browser. Ice isn't Fire and a Cat isn't a Fox, so it is clearly 
a different package (we don't want Mozilla blamed for our mistakes, nor 
cause confusion with their trademarks), but is equally clearly 
intimately related (of course nearly all of the work comes from the 
Mozilla foundation effort, so we want to give credit).

The gNewSense BurningDog browser and the Debian IceWeasel browser are 
similarly derived from Firefox, also with the intent of being free 
software. Technically, however, these projects are maintained entirely 
independently of IceCat. (Previously, this GNU browser project was also 
named IceWeasel, but that proved confusing.) "
- https://www.gnu.org/software/gnuzilla/

And, chroming is dangerous.

....
Bret Busby
Armadale
Western Australia
(UTC+0800)
.................

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#266406

On 22/1/24 02:13, Bret Busby wrote:
> On 21/1/24 23:12, Klaus Singvogel wrote:
>> Bret Busby wrote:
>>> On 21/1/24 18:36, Bret Busby wrote:
>>>> On 21/1/24 18:16, Klaus Singvogel wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> If the PDF is editable (has the option to fill out the blanks), I
>>>>> use often chromium.
>>>>>
>> [...]
>>>> My understanding of the nature of chromium, is that it retrieves all 
>>>> the
>>>> data that is input to chromium, and onsells it.
>>>>
>>>> chroming is dangerous.
>>
>>> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-01-18/chrome-incognito-mode-privacy-warning-change/103361328
>>
>> Did you notice, that I was talking about the reduced, crippled 
>> OpenSource browser: chromium, which is based on chrome. But I was not 
>> talking about the chrome itself.
>>
>> AFAIK are these Google related parts removed in chromium; at least 
>> they were several years ago.
>>
>> Best regards,
> Ah.
> 
> Then, perhaps, the open source derivative should have been named 
> something else, for example, Wolfram, which is in the same group as 
> chromium, to be not confused with chrome.
> 
> I note that  the name iceape is sufficiently different to seamonkey, and 
> iceweasel sufficiently different to firefox, to not be confused with the 
> original.
> 
> Similarly with icecat and burningdog -
> 
> " The name “IceCat” was coined to show our relationship to the Mozilla 
> Firefox browser. Ice isn't Fire and a Cat isn't a Fox, so it is clearly 
> a different package (we don't want Mozilla blamed for our mistakes, nor 
> cause confusion with their trademarks), but is equally clearly 
> intimately related (of course nearly all of the work comes from the 
> Mozilla foundation effort, so we want to give credit).
> 
> The gNewSense BurningDog browser and the Debian IceWeasel browser are 
> similarly derived from Firefox, also with the intent of being free 
> software. Technically, however, these projects are maintained entirely 
> independently of IceCat. (Previously, this GNU browser project was also 
> named IceWeasel, but that proved confusing.) "
> - https://www.gnu.org/software/gnuzilla/
> 
> And, chroming is dangerous.
> 
> ....
> Bret Busby
> Armadale
> Western Australia
> (UTC+0800)
> .................
In looking into this a bit further, at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromium_%28web_browser%29
is

"
Chromium is a free and open-source web browser project, primarily 
developed and maintained by Google.[8] This codebase provides the vast 
majority of code for the Google Chrome browser, which is proprietary 
software with additional features.

The Chromium codebase is widely used. Microsoft Edge, Samsung Internet, 
Opera, and many other browsers are based on the Chromium code. Moreover, 
significant portions of the code are used by several app frameworks.
"

So, regarding
"chromium, which is based on chrome" (in the message above)
it appears to be the inverse, but, both  still controlled by the google 
borg.

....
Bret Busby
Armadale
Western Australia
(UTC+0800)
.................

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#266399

On Sun, Jan 21, 2024 at 01:30:41PM -0500, gene heskett wrote:
> > > > chroming is dangerous.
> 
> I haven't touched it since they hijacked port 80 so you cannot use it
> locally.

Gene, this is NOT true.  Chrome does not "hijack port 80".  You can
go to http://localhost:80/ to talk to a local web server *just fine*
in Chrome.

This is another one of your imaginary problems, which has already been
disproved, but to which you still cling.  You seem to have many of these.

I'm not going to spend the time to dig up the old thread in which you
first espoused this idea, and in which I showed you that it's untrue.
That would be a waste of my time.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#266410

On Sun, 21 Jan 2024, Greg Wooledge wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 21, 2024 at 01:30:41PM -0500, gene heskett wrote:
>>>>> chroming is dangerous.
>>
>> I haven't touched it since they hijacked port 80 so you cannot use it
>> locally.
>
> Gene, this is NOT true.  Chrome does not "hijack port 80".  You can
> go to http://localhost:80/ to talk to a local web server *just fine*
> in Chrome.
>
> This is another one of your imaginary problems, which has already been
> disproved, but to which you still cling.  You seem to have many of these.
>
> I'm not going to spend the time to dig up the old thread in which you
> first espoused this idea, and in which I showed you that it's untrue.
> That would be a waste of my time.
>

but in one of your previous emails you stated

"Yeah, I wasn't 100% correct in my previous message."

so how much of this message should gene follow

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#266412

 Greg Wooledge writes:
> Chrome does not "hijack port 80".  You can go to http://localhost:80/
> to talk to a local web server *just fine* in Chrome.

And in Chromium.  And in Firefox or Lynx when Chromium is running.
Nothing's being hijacked.
-- 
John Hasler 
john@sugarbit.com
Elmwood, WI USA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#266414

On 1/21/24 13:36, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 21, 2024 at 01:30:41PM -0500, gene heskett wrote:
>>>>> chroming is dangerous.
>>
>> I haven't touched it since they hijacked port 80 so you cannot use it
>> locally.
> 
> Gene, this is NOT true.  Chrome does not "hijack port 80".  You can
> go to http://localhost:80/ to talk to a local web server *just fine*
> in Chrome.
> 
> This is another one of your imaginary problems, which has already been
> disproved, but to which you still cling.  You seem to have many of these.
> 
> I'm not going to spend the time to dig up the old thread in which you
> first espoused this idea, and in which I showed you that it's untrue.
> That would be a waste of my time.
> 
I take it you are speaking from debian

I can't make it work here and can supply screenshots if the server will 
pass them. Armbian uses the debian-arm repos for everything but the 
iso's. and snaps. First noticed on armbian installs here a few months 
ago. However it appears I have nuked it from all the armbian machines 
live ATM. And from this one too. So I can't even supply the screenshots.

Some versions of klipper, the 3d printer driver, used port 80 to display 
klippers web page, as did octoprint and friends but late versions of 
klipper now serve their web page on port 10088 to get around this 
problem. Since chromium is the default browser on armbian, I've spent 
several hours scattered over 2 weeks to make it work, failed on every 
machine that had it. Every time it was ran and asked for file:// or 
http:// localhost:80 you wind up looking at google seatch failure screen 
saying there is no such thing as localhost. True even if I gave it the 
name or ipv4 address of any machine on my network as long as it was 
ending in :80 or left blank. https to Port 8080 works but none of my 
printers use https. It might work, if my cable supplied modem was 
provisioned for ipv6. Since I'm 150 miles so of the nearest ipv6 address 
here I don't expect it to work anytime soon.  You might have an old copy 
that still works, but I'm not making it up. I do know what I've seen.

Cheers, Gene Heskett.
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
  soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
  - Louis D. Brandeis

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#266420

On Sun, Jan 21, 2024 at 02:26:42PM -0500, gene heskett wrote:
> Every time it was ran and asked for file:// or http:// localhost:80 you wind
> up looking at google seatch failure screen saying there is no such thing as
> localhost.

$ host localhost
$ grep localhost /etc/hosts
$ grep hosts /etc/nsswitch.conf

Chrome doesn't treat "localhost" specially.  It just looks it up like any
other hostname.  If your local definition of "localhost" is screwed up,
then you will get screwed-up results.  I'm pretty certain this was what
we concluded last time you brought this up -- that your /etc/hosts file
had an incorrect or missing entry for localhost.

Here's what it should look like:

unicorn:~$ host localhost
localhost has address 127.0.0.1
unicorn:~$ grep localhost /etc/hosts
127.0.0.1   localhost
::1     localhost ip6-localhost ip6-loopback
unicorn:~$ grep hosts /etc/nsswitch.conf
hosts:          files mdns4_minimal [NOTFOUND=return] dns

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#266422

On 1/21/24 14:58, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 21, 2024 at 02:26:42PM -0500, gene heskett wrote:
>> Every time it was ran and asked for file:// or http:// localhost:80 you wind
>> up looking at google seatch failure screen saying there is no such thing as
>> localhost.
> 
> $ host localhost
> $ grep localhost /etc/hosts
> $ grep hosts /etc/nsswitch.conf
> 
> Chrome doesn't treat "localhost" specially.  It just looks it up like any
> other hostname.  If your local definition of "localhost" is screwed up,
> then you will get screwed-up results.  I'm pretty certain this was what
> we concluded last time you brought this up -- that your /etc/hosts file
> had an incorrect or missing entry for localhost.
> 
> Here's what it should look like:
> 
> unicorn:~$ host localhost
> localhost has address 127.0.0.1
> unicorn:~$ grep localhost /etc/hosts
> 127.0.0.1   localhost
> ::1     localhost ip6-localhost ip6-loopback
> unicorn:~$ grep hosts /etc/nsswitch.conf
> hosts:          files mdns4_minimal [NOTFOUND=return] dns
> 
> .
Every /etc/hosts file is the same here, and all contain
127.0.0.1	localhost
without a alias.
one of the armbians that does not work with chromium:
gene@bpi52:~$ cat /etc/nsswitch.conf
# /etc/nsswitch.conf
#
# Example configuration of GNU Name Service Switch functionality.
# If you have the `glibc-doc-reference' and `info' packages installed, try:
# `info libc "Name Service Switch"' for information about this file.

passwd:         files
group:          files
shadow:         files
gshadow:        files

hosts:          files mymachines dns myhostname
networks:       files

protocols:      db files
services:       db files
ethers:         db files
rpc:            db files

netgroup:       nis

That's as installed, but hosts: line looks skunky to me.
what do mymachines and myhostname actually translate to?

Cheers, Gene Heskett.
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
  soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
  - Louis D. Brandeis

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#266423

On Sun, Jan 21, 2024 at 03:20:09PM -0500, gene heskett wrote:
> hosts:          files mymachines dns myhostname

> That's as installed, but hosts: line looks skunky to me.
> what do mymachines and myhostname actually translate to?

They are the names of software packages (libraries) that are installed
on your system.

https://manpages.debian.org/bookworm/libnss-mymachines/nss-mymachines.8.en.html

https://manpages.debian.org/bookworm/libnss-myhostname/nss-myhostname.8.en.html

They shouldn't actually do anything, so long as the hostname being
looked up ("localhost" in this case) is found in /etc/hosts first.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#266427

On 1/21/24 15:34, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 21, 2024 at 03:20:09PM -0500, gene heskett wrote:
>> hosts:          files mymachines dns myhostname
> 
>> That's as installed, but hosts: line looks skunky to me.
>> what do mymachines and myhostname actually translate to?
> 
> They are the names of software packages (libraries) that are installed
> on your system.
> 
> https://manpages.debian.org/bookworm/libnss-mymachines/nss-mymachines.8.en.html
> 
> https://manpages.debian.org/bookworm/libnss-myhostname/nss-myhostname.8.en.html
> 
> They shouldn't actually do anything, so long as the hostname being
> looked up ("localhost" in this case) is found in /etc/hosts first.
> 
> .
gene@bpi52:~$ sudo mymachines
sudo: mymachines: command not found
gene@bpi52:~$
gene@bpi52:~$ sudo myhostname
sudo: myhostname: command not found
gene@bpi52:~$
still puzzledGreg  How tp verify dns? Its the same relay bounce with 
this for /etc/resolv.conf, one line
ene@bpi52:~$ cat /etc/resolv.conf
# Generated by NetworkManager
nameserver 192.168.71.1

And it seems to work:
gene@bpi52:~$ ping -c1 yahoo.com
PING yahoo.com (74.6.231.20): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 74.6.231.20: icmp_seq=0 ttl=49 time=49.130 ms
--- yahoo.com ping statistics ---
1 packets transmitted, 1 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 49.130/49.130/49.130/0.000 ms

Thanks Greg

Cheers, Gene Heskett.
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
  soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
  - Louis D. Brandeis

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#266459

On 2024-01-21, Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 21, 2024 at 01:30:41PM -0500, gene heskett wrote:
>> > > > chroming is dangerous.
>> 
>> I haven't touched it since they hijacked port 80 so you cannot use it
>> locally.
>
> Gene, this is NOT true.  Chrome does not "hijack port 80".  You can
> go to http://localhost:80/ to talk to a local web server *just fine*
> in Chrome.

I think Firefox can now fill out and save fillable pdf forms (and even
add text to ones that are not even editable). So Gene may
obviate his moral allergy by adopting another route.

People with causes often display a tendency of making their points with a
careless regard for the truth (as they feel, I suppose, that the end
justifies the means).

> This is another one of your imaginary problems, which has already been
> disproved, but to which you still cling.  You seem to have many of these.
>
> I'm not going to spend the time to dig up the old thread in which you
> first espoused this idea, and in which I showed you that it's untrue.
> That would be a waste of my time.
>
>


-- 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#266469

On 1/22/24 11:56, Curt wrote:
> On 2024-01-21, Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 21, 2024 at 01:30:41PM -0500, gene heskett wrote:
>>>>>> chroming is dangerous.
>>>
>>> I haven't touched it since they hijacked port 80 so you cannot use it
>>> locally.
>>
>> Gene, this is NOT true.  Chrome does not "hijack port 80".  You can
>> go to http://localhost:80/ to talk to a local web server *just fine*
>> in Chrome.
> 
> I think Firefox can now fill out and save fillable pdf forms (and even
> add text to ones that are not even editable). So Gene may
> obviate his moral allergy by adopting another route.

I don't think that was the case here, none of the utility's suggested in 
this thread could find a form space to fill, and I wound up cobbleing it 
together using fldsed, whose interface is quite clunky but more or less, 
complete with speeling errors, typu's and overstrikes, did get the job 
done, and exported as pdf. Fed to the printer ia okular it was pixel 
accurate. I'll compose an email hopefully explaining their broken pdf 
composer made my reply very difficult, and suggesting they take a look 
at OpenOffice Writer, which I think CAN be coaxed into doing what they 
thought they were doing with their pdf composer.

I've not emailed it back to them as an attachment yet but will before 
the end of my day.

Thanks Curt.

> People with causes often display a tendency of making their points with a
> careless regard for the truth (as they feel, I suppose, that the end
> justifies the means).

It was and is the truth as I see it on my screens here. Everyone else 
claims if "127.0.0.1   localhost" is present in the /etc/hosts files 
which it is, that it should Just Work, but it doesn't here. Firefox 
OTOH, does Just Work.

>> This is another one of your imaginary problems, which has already been
>> disproved, but to which you still cling.  You seem to have many of these.

Tell me about it, but they have existed here since I put the 12.2 
netinstall iso on a dvd and rebooted to it the first time which has been 
the subject of numerous prior threads because the installer finds ANY 
usb-serial adaptor plugged in, assunes I am blind and installs brltty 
and orca without once asking be if I wanted it.  And they cannot be 
removed once installed, or the execute bits removed and still reboot the 
system when needed, That alone caused over 20 re-installs before someone 
took pity on me and said to unplug the usb tree as it was reacting to 
the adapter feeding a cm11a for heyu's use.
>>
>> I'm not going to spend the time to dig up the old thread in which you
>> first espoused this idea, and in which I showed you that it's untrue.
>> That would be a waste of my time.

And mine too until its fixed to Just Work.
Take care, stay warm, dry and well, Curt.

Cheers, Gene Heskett.
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
  soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
  - Louis D. Brandeis

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#266400

On 1/21/24 10:12, Klaus Singvogel wrote:
> Bret Busby wrote:
>> On 21/1/24 18:36, Bret Busby wrote:
>>> On 21/1/24 18:16, Klaus Singvogel wrote:
>>>>
>>>> If the PDF is editable (has the option to fill out the blanks), I
>>>> use often chromium.
>>>>
> [...]
>>> My understanding of the nature of chromium, is that it retrieves all the
>>> data that is input to chromium, and onsells it.
>>>
>>> chroming is dangerous.

I haven't touched it since they hijacked port 80 so you cannot use it 
locally.  Their thirst for my data is inexcusable and unforgiveable.
> 
>> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-01-18/chrome-incognito-mode-privacy-warning-change/103361328
> 
> Did you notice, that I was talking about the reduced, crippled OpenSource browser: chromium, which is based on chrome. But I was not talking about the chrome itself.
> 
> AFAIK are these Google related parts removed in chromium; at least they were several years ago.
> 
> Best regards,
> 	Klaus.

Cheers, Gene Heskett.
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
  soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
  - Louis D. Brandeis

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#266401

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sun, Jan 21, 2024 at 01:30:41PM -0500, gene heskett wrote:

[chromium/chrome]

> I haven't touched it since they hijacked port 80 so you cannot use it
> locally.  Their thirst for my data is inexcusable and unforgiveable.

I don't thing they do that. I mean "Google does things", but they
are far more subtle than this.

Cheers
-- 
t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#266404

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sun, Jan 21, 2024 at 01:36:27PM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > Did you notice, that I was talking about the reduced, crippled OpenSource
> > browser: chromium, which is based on chrome. But I was not talking about the
> > chrome itself.
> >
> > AFAIK are these Google related parts removed in chromium; at least
> >  they were several years ago.
> 
> I wonder if that's the case.  AFAIK Chromium is distributed by Google,
> so it's just Chrome with the proprietary bits removed.  I'd be surprised
> if Google was going through the trouble to remove the bits that are
> beneficial to them.
> 
> I'd expect a de-Googlized version of Chrome/Chromium to be named
> differently (maybe Wolfram, as suggested by Bret) and distributed by
> some other team (one that cares more about Free Software and privacy
> than Google).

Wolfram is taken. Perhaps Vanadium?

Cheers
-- 
t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#266411

On 22/1/24 02:44, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 21, 2024 at 01:36:27PM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>>> Did you notice, that I was talking about the reduced, crippled OpenSource
>>> browser: chromium, which is based on chrome. But I was not talking about the
>>> chrome itself.
>>>
>>> AFAIK are these Google related parts removed in chromium; at least
>>>   they were several years ago.
>>
>> I wonder if that's the case.  AFAIK Chromium is distributed by Google,
>> so it's just Chrome with the proprietary bits removed.  I'd be surprised
>> if Google was going through the trouble to remove the bits that are
>> beneficial to them.
>>
>> I'd expect a de-Googlized version of Chrome/Chromium to be named
>> differently (maybe Wolfram, as suggested by Bret) and distributed by
>> some other team (one that cares more about Free Software and privacy
>> than Google).
> 
> Wolfram is taken. Perhaps Vanadium?
> 
> Cheers
No - Wolfram is in the same group as Chromium, but, whilst Vanadium is 
in the same period as Chromium, it is in Group 5, rather than Group 6, 
in which, are Chromium (Cr), Molybdenum (Mo) (which sounds like the 
jeans that Molly was wearing :) ), Wolfram (W) (commonly known as 
Tungsten),  and Seaborgium (Sg (but not Singapore :) ) (which makes it 
sound like one of the borgs (microsoft, google, etc) have hijacked a 
sealiner).

So, maybe, a good, alternative name, for an open source web browser like 
chrome/chromium, but, not controlled by the google borg, should 
probably, best and most simply, be named NotChroming...

:)

....
Bret Busby
Armadale
Western Australia
(UTC+0800)
.................

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web