[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: gufw problem

On 12/08/2015 10:55 PM, Francis Gerund wrote:

Thank you, Jape.  This was the answer:
I guess I'm going to have to learn to hunt down (and to read) bug
reports.  Ugh!

Reading Is Fundamental (blast from the past).

When you don't know how things work, it's the man pages.

When things don't work the way they should, it's the bug reports.

If you're new to this, sit back and relax and enjoy it. It's actually a lot easier to solve problems like this in a GNU/Linux distribution than it is in something like MS Windows. I mean, for any package you find in Debian there are going to be man pages and bug reports, and probably tons of other data, too.

I look at it kind of like an adventure game with puzzles, like Myst or Riven (more blasts from the past).

Just editing the desktop.gufw file to comment out the offending (and
offensive!) line fixed it.
It now shows up (and works) in the "Favorites" bar and the application
menu,  and I was even able to add it to the "classic" applications menu
in the Gnome 3 "classic" desktop view.

So it works in Gnome 3.  Perhaps in XFCE there is a similar
configuration file that could be edited the same way (I don't use XFCE,
so I don't know).

Yes, I tested the solution in Xfce before I posted it. But I thought you'd have to test it in Gnome before we could be absolutely certain it would work there.

BTW, I really think that "blocking" line in the desktop.gufw was
deliberate.  I think they knew exactly what they were doing.

Yes, of course. That line didn't write itself. I think it's really odd, too, but I'm sure that whoever is responsible for it thought that there was a good reason.

The package was actually developed under Ubuntu, if I remember correctly. Maybe there was a difference in the way menus are handled under the various desktop environments in Debian and Ubuntu. I wouldn't know. The last time I touched Ubuntu was a long time before Unity came along.

Thanks again to all for the help.

Just as a matter of etiquette for this mailing list, I thought I'd mention a couple of things.

1. It's best not to reply directly to another user's e-mail address -- unless that user has specifically requested to be CC'd. Most people who post here subscribe to the list, so they will receive any response you make to the debian-user list. If you send to the list and to them, they get two copies of each message.

Many mail clients and browser-based mail systems (like gmail) make it too easy to respond accidentally to a personal e-mail address instead of to the list address. It happens by accident all the time. But it's something you might want to avoid, if you can.

2. When replying, it's also usually considered best on this list (and on many other technical lists) to user interleaved reply format -- like the way I've been replying to you.

It may take a bit of practice to get the quoting down right when replying in this manner. Editing and interleaving can mess up attribution of what was said and who said it, so you do have to be careful. But it's considered to be the best way to communicate on this list. That's because you can respond to each specific point made by another person with your own point in close proximity. That makes it easy for other readers to get the context of your points.

If you examine your reply carefully before sending you should be able to see whether or not your editing and interleaving have messed up any of the context.


I'm glad you got this sorted out. I was pleased to be able to help a little.

Best regards,

Reply to: