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

Groups > linux.debian.user > #220889 > unrolled thread

x-www-browser doesn't change even after package delete, update-alternatives

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

Contents

  x-www-browser doesn't change even after package delete,  update-alternatives Carl Fink <carl@finknetwork.com> - 2020-04-04 18:50 +0200
    Re: x-www-browser doesn't change even after package delete,  update-alternatives Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-04-05 08:20 +0200
      Re: x-www-browser doesn't change even after package delete,  update-alternatives Carl Fink <carl@finknetwork.com> - 2020-04-05 13:40 +0200
        Re: x-www-browser doesn't change even after package delete,  update-alternatives Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-04-05 14:40 +0200
          Re: x-www-browser doesn't change even after package delete,  update-alternatives Carl Fink <carlf@panix.com> - 2020-04-05 16:00 +0200
            Re: x-www-browser doesn't change even after package delete,  update-alternatives David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2020-04-05 18:00 +0200
              Re: x-www-browser doesn't change even after package delete,  update-alternatives Carl Fink <carl@finknetwork.com> - 2020-04-05 22:30 +0200
            Re: x-www-browser doesn't change even after package delete,  update-alternatives "Alexander V. Makartsev" <avbetev@gmail.com> - 2020-04-05 20:10 +0200
              Re: x-www-browser doesn't change even after package delete,  update-alternatives Carl Fink <carl@finknetwork.com> - 2020-04-05 22:30 +0200
                Re: x-www-browser doesn't change even after package delete,  update-alternatives Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-04-06 10:00 +0200
                  Re: x-www-browser doesn't change even after package delete,  update-alternatives Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2020-04-06 11:50 +0200
                    Re: x-www-browser doesn't change even after package delete,  update-alternatives Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-04-06 12:20 +0200
                  Re: x-www-browser doesn't change even after package delete,  update-alternatives Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2020-04-06 12:40 +0200

#220889 — x-www-browser doesn't change even after package delete, update-alternatives

So, I removed firefox-esr and replaced it with stable firefox. I ran
update-alternatives to point to firefox-esr. The current listing doesn't
even include firefox-esr:

root@debian-NUCi5:~# update-alternatives --list x-www-browser
/usr/bin/chromium
/usr/bin/epiphany-browser
/usr/bin/firefox
/usr/bin/surf

When I run 'rclone config' this happens:

Failed to execute default Web Browser.

Failed to execute child process "/usr/bin/firefox-esr' (no such file or
directory).

Note that the incorrect punctuation is as shown in the GUI dialog that pops up.

I click OK, and the text-mode rclone (why is the error GUI but the program
itself in the terminal?) sits there saying "waiting for code ..." forever.
Not a graceful way to handle the failure to log into Google, is it?

If rclone isn't looking for the browser in the alternatives, where is it
looking? Firefox-esr hasn't been on this system for weeks. 

I did try launching a fresh Xfce-terminal from the menu, but got the same
error.

Thanks in advance.
-- 
Carl Fink                                                  carl@finknetwork.com 
https://reasonablyliterate.com                           https://nitpicking.com 
If you want to make a point, somebody will take the point and stab you with it. 
	-Kenne Estes

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#220905

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

On Sb, 04 apr 20, 12:32:06, Carl Fink wrote:
> So, I removed firefox-esr and replaced it with stable firefox. I ran
> update-alternatives to point to firefox-esr. The current listing doesn't
> even include firefox-esr:
 
This makes no sense to me, could you please rephrase? What browser do 
you have installed right now? How did you install firefox-esr and 
firefox?

> root@debian-NUCi5:~# update-alternatives --list x-www-browser
> /usr/bin/chromium
> /usr/bin/epiphany-browser
> /usr/bin/firefox
> /usr/bin/surf

Please post the output of

    update-alternatives --config x-www-browser

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

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

#220911

On Sun, Apr 05, 2020 at 09:12:54AM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Sb, 04 apr 20, 12:32:06, Carl Fink wrote:
> > So, I removed firefox-esr and replaced it with stable firefox. I ran
> > update-alternatives to point to firefox-esr. The current listing doesn't
> > even include firefox-esr:
>  
> This makes no sense to me, could you please rephrase? What browser do 
> you have installed right now? How did you install firefox-esr and 
> firefox?

Right now, stable Firefox from mozilla.org binary. Previously, the firefox-esr
package from Debian Stable, installed and removed using apt.

> > root@debian-NUCi5:~# update-alternatives --list x-www-browser
> > /usr/bin/chromium
> > /usr/bin/epiphany-browser
> > /usr/bin/firefox
> > /usr/bin/surf
> 
> Please post the output of
> 
>     update-alternatives --config x-www-browser

carlf@debian-NUCi5:~$ update-alternatives --config x-www-browser
There are 4 choices for the alternative x-www-browser (providing /usr/bin/x-www-browser).

  Selection    Path                       Priority   Status
------------------------------------------------------------
* 0            /usr/bin/epiphany-browser   85        auto mode
  1            /usr/bin/chromium           40        manual mode
  2            /usr/bin/epiphany-browser   85        manual mode
  3            /usr/bin/firefox            20        manual mode
  4            /usr/bin/surf               30        manual mode

Press <enter> to keep the current choice[*], or type selection number: 



Note that the current selection 3 was added after I posted (by manually
creating a .desktop file).  And that doing that had no effect on how rclone
reacted--it still tried to launch a nonexistent firefox-esr.

I worked around the problem by making a symbolic link from
/usr/bin/chromium to /usr/bin/firefox-esr (because I do all my
organizational Google stuff, and only Google stuff, using Chromium, to keep
organizational Google stuff separate from my personal things).

(Then I found out that rclone, despite having the motto "rsync for cloud
storage", doesn't actually do what rsync does, which was disappointing.)
-- 
Carl Fink                                                  carl@finknetwork.com 
https://reasonablyliterate.com                           https://nitpicking.com 
If you want to make a point, somebody will take the point and stab you with it. 
	-Kenne Estes

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

#220913

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

On Du, 05 apr 20, 07:35:00, Carl Fink wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 05, 2020 at 09:12:54AM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > 
> > Please post the output of
> > 
> >     update-alternatives --config x-www-browser
> 
> carlf@debian-NUCi5:~$ update-alternatives --config x-www-browser
> There are 4 choices for the alternative x-www-browser (providing /usr/bin/x-www-browser).
> 
>   Selection    Path                       Priority   Status
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> * 0            /usr/bin/epiphany-browser   85        auto mode
>   1            /usr/bin/chromium           40        manual mode
>   2            /usr/bin/epiphany-browser   85        manual mode
>   3            /usr/bin/firefox            20        manual mode
>   4            /usr/bin/surf               30        manual mode
> 
> Press <enter> to keep the current choice[*], or type selection number: 
> 
> 
> 
> Note that the current selection 3 was added after I posted (by manually
> creating a .desktop file).  And that doing that had no effect on how rclone
> reacted--it still tried to launch a nonexistent firefox-esr.

The output above shows epiphany-browser as being the current selection.

Maybe rclone is not using x-www-browser, but some other mechanism (or 
just hardcodes firefox).

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

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

#220925

On 4/5/20 8:37 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> The output above shows epiphany-browser as being the current selection. 
True. But not relevant.
> Maybe rclone is not using x-www-browser, but some other mechanism (or
> just hardcodes firefox).
>
I asked what other mechanism could be used in the original, at the
same time I quoted a message from rclone saying that it was trying to
run /usr/bin/firefox-esr, which is unlikely to be hardcoded.
-- 
Carl Fink                           nitpicking@nitpicking.com
Read my blog at blog.nitpicking.com.  Reviews!  Observations!

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

#220933

On Sun 05 Apr 2020 at 09:53:13 (-0400), Carl Fink wrote:
> On 4/5/20 8:37 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > The output above shows epiphany-browser as being the current
> > selection.
> True. But not relevant.
> > Maybe rclone is not using x-www-browser, but some other mechanism (or
> > just hardcodes firefox).
> > 
> I asked what other mechanism could be used in the original, at the
> same time I quoted a message from rclone saying that it was trying to
> run /usr/bin/firefox-esr, which is unlikely to be hardcoded.

Is it worth running rclone config with -vv, and --log-file pointing
somewhere? The documentation suggests this will show what rclone is
trying to do.

Cheers,
David.

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

#220949

On Sun, Apr 05, 2020 at 10:52:23AM -0500, David Wright wrote:

> Is it worth running rclone config with -vv, and --log-file pointing
> somewhere? The documentation suggests this will show what rclone is
> trying to do.

Not any more, since my ln -s trick worked. Thanks for the suggestions,
though.
-- 
Carl Fink                                                  carl@finknetwork.com 
https://reasonablyliterate.com                           https://nitpicking.com 
If you want to make a point, somebody will take the point and stab you with it. 
	-Kenne Estes

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

#220939

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

On 05.04.2020 18:53, Carl Fink wrote:
> On 4/5/20 8:37 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
>> The output above shows epiphany-browser as being the current selection. 
> True. But not relevant.
>> Maybe rclone is not using x-www-browser, but some other mechanism (or
>> just hardcodes firefox).
>>
> I asked what other mechanism could be used in the original, at the
> same time I quoted a message from rclone saying that it was trying to
> run /usr/bin/firefox-esr, which is unlikely to be hardcoded.
If I'm getting it right, you are using Xfce, so first place you should
look at is "exo-preferred-applications" [1] applet.
It probably points to a "/usr/bin/sensible-browser" wrapper script to
find a default browser among several "alternatives" links.
"x-www-browser" is not the only default link for a browser, so you
should also check "alternatives" for "gnome-www-browser", "www-browser"
configs.
Also check if environment variable named "$BROWSER" is set. It is not
required to be set, but some console programs could rely on it and this
is the first thing "sensible-browser" script uses to find your default
browser.
Probably because of installation of a "unsupported" firefox package
"alternatives" for a browser were not changed, so you will have to
create additional options for "alternatives" configs, so links would
point to a right browser.
Check out man page for "update-alternatives" to find out how to create
new options for existing configs and manually switch between them.

[1] https://docs.xfce.org/xfce/exo/preferred-applications

-- 
With kindest regards, Alexander.

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ 
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian - The universal operating system
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://www.debian.org
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ 

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

#220948

On Sun, Apr 05, 2020 at 11:03:07PM +0500, Alexander V. Makartsev wrote:

> If I'm getting it right, you are using Xfce, so first place you should
> look at is "exo-preferred-applications" [1] applet.

And that was it. Thank you. Now if only rclone actually did what I needed
....

This is getting well beyond Debian, but why would GNU/Linux in general have
so many overlapping ways to register default applications?

Should I report as a bug (in exo-preferred-applications) that removing a
package (firefox-esr) didn't remove it as the default?
-- 
Carl Fink                                                  carl@finknetwork.com 
https://reasonablyliterate.com                           https://nitpicking.com 
If you want to make a point, somebody will take the point and stab you with it. 
	-Kenne Estes

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

#220965

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

On Du, 05 apr 20, 16:20:42, Carl Fink wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 05, 2020 at 11:03:07PM +0500, Alexander V. Makartsev wrote:
> 
> > If I'm getting it right, you are using Xfce, so first place you should
> > look at is "exo-preferred-applications" [1] applet.
> 
> And that was it. Thank you. Now if only rclone actually did what I needed
> ....
> 
> This is getting well beyond Debian, but why would GNU/Linux in general have
> so many overlapping ways to register default applications?

Probably a case of competing standards.

https://xkcd.com/927/

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

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

#220970

On 2020-04-06, Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> This is getting well beyond Debian, but why would GNU/Linux in general have
>> so many overlapping ways to register default applications?
>
> Probably a case of competing standards.

Seems more like the distinction between a user-defined preference
(*Preferred Applications* button in the Xfce Settings Manager) and a
system-wide default (/etc/alternatives being designed for the case where
the user has failed to specify a particular preference among two or
more alternatives). That rclone would privilege the former over the
latter seems completely reasonable to me.

> https://xkcd.com/927/
>
> Kind regards,
> Andrei

> http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser
>

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

#220973

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

On Lu, 06 apr 20, 09:46:50, Curt wrote:
> On 2020-04-06, Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> This is getting well beyond Debian, but why would GNU/Linux in general have
> >> so many overlapping ways to register default applications?
> >
> > Probably a case of competing standards.
> 
> Seems more like the distinction between a user-defined preference
> (*Preferred Applications* button in the Xfce Settings Manager) and a
> system-wide default (/etc/alternatives being designed for the case where
> the user has failed to specify a particular preference among two or
> more alternatives). That rclone would privilege the former over the
> latter seems completely reasonable to me.

The "/etc/alternatives" mechanism is  Debian specific, there is little 
incentive for various upstreams to use it.

As far as I know whatever "Preferred Applications" mechanism the DE is 
using is also not standardized, which doesn't help :(

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

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

#220976

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

Andrei POPESCU (12020-04-06):
> Probably a case of competing standards.

That, and a case of gambit pileup when software try to be smart, to
out-smart the other software implementing the other standards to make
them interact with their own, while the other software do exactly the
same, and end up being very stupid.

Regards,

-- 
  Nicolas George

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

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

csiph-web