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 b
On Lu, 06 apr 20, 09:46:50, Curt wrote:
> On 2020-04-06, Andrei POPESCU 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 t
On 2020-04-06, Andrei POPESCU 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
(*Prefe
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 r
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.
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 we
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 wh
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
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, a
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 t
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:
>
> Th
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 hav
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/bi
13 matches
Mail list logo
