Thanks for keeping tabs here, I've been using --force-gui for some time now, before it was the default. May or may not be a useful tidbit.
> Is it possible the qt-settings file is created by something other than > Octave on your system? I've only been using the current debian packages, and nothing special, so no, I don't think there is any other software altering this file. I've certainly not been playing with it, and this is a single-user system. > Do you think there is any remaining issue here, or do you consider this > resolved by fixing the configuration file on your end? > > Or is the only issue here that the settings dialog implies that the > missing value defaults to 'false', while the actual behavior is to > interpret a missing value as 'true'? I don't think it is resolved - other people could have the same issue and not realise. I think there are two points, the first is more important than the second: 1) The GUI should be clear as to what setting the backend is currently using. I think it is a concern that there are two settings that have the capacity to be "out-of-sync". 2) From a debian user's/policy perspective, I think the GUI should default to not using a network connection for an application where this might be surprising to an end user. Either querying the user again, or defaulting to false would be best Thanks! On 21.09.2017 22:56, Mike Miller wrote: > Is it possible the qt-settings file is created by something other than > Octave on your system?
