[02:21] <mrjoeyman> Does the latest version of Mate utilize Snap?
[03:05] <aym>  HexChat: 2.9.6 ** OS: Linux 4.4.0-24-lowlatency x86_64 ** Distro: Debian jessie/sid ** CPU: 8 x AMD FX(tm)-8350 Eight-Core Processor (AuthenticAMD) @ 1,40GHz ** RAM: Physical: 15,6GB, 75,7% free ** Disk: Total: 2,9TB, 19,1% free ** VGA: NVIDIA Corporation GF110 [GeForce GTX 580] ** Sound: HDA-Intel - HDA ATI SB1: USB-Audio - USB Device 0x46d:0x8252: HDA-Intel - HDA NVidia3: Audigy2 - SB Audigy 2 ZS [SB0350a] *
[03:05] <aym> * Ethernet: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. CIe Gigabit Ethernet ** Uptime: 16h 19m 0s **
[04:57] <fifty-sevenC_> What's up people?
[06:34] <phoenixi> is ubuntu mate arm heavy for raspberry pi 3
[06:34] <phoenixi> my pi seems a bit slower then raspbian
[06:34] <phoenixi> especially on the mozilla firefox browser
[06:35] <alkisg> Firefox on raspbian should be the same as firefox on mate...
[06:35] <alkisg> On the other hand, mate probably needs more RAM, more disk access etc, so a faster SD card or external disk would be better
[06:36] <phoenixi> its class 10 16gb
[06:36] <alkisg> And you think firefox is faster on raspbian vs mate?
[06:37] <phoenixi> no. I didn't really install firefox on raspbian
[06:37] <alkisg> (09:34:46 πμ) phoenixi: especially on the mozilla firefox browser
[06:37]  * alkisg shrugs...
[06:37] <phoenixi> I just want to know if firefox is heavy on raspbian
[06:37] <alkisg> You should be asking on #raspbian then, no?
[06:37] <phoenixi> if yes then maybe I should checkout other browsers
[06:38] <alkisg> In general, rpi is 50 times slower than e.g. a core i3
[06:38] <phoenixi> sorry, i meant mate*
[06:38] <alkisg> No it's not heavy, but rpi3 has a very slow cpu, so all things run slower there
[06:39] <phoenixi> alkisg, ok :+1:
[06:39] <alkisg> :)
[06:39] <phoenixi> Sorry, I didn't knew emojis don't work on irc :sweat_smile: :P
[06:43] <phoenixi> mate locks after some time of inactivity
[06:44] <phoenixi> after that time, will ssh work or not?
[06:44] <ouroumov> it will work
[06:44] <alkisg> If you mean the screensaver, sure, it will work
[06:44] <alkisg> If you mean that mate hangs, it's another question...
[06:45] <phoenixi> thanks ouroumov , alkisg
[06:45] <phoenixi> I mean the sceensaver alkisg
[06:45] <alkisg> OK
[06:49] <phoenixi> Why are some versions of software on `apt` not the latest versions
[06:50] <phoenixi> for instance, the version of vagrant on apt is 1.4.x and on the official website it is 1.9.x
[06:50] <phoenixi> That is a huge difference ,isn't it?
[06:51] <alkisg> Linux distributions freeze at the point of their release
[06:51] <alkisg> And the software needs to be tested before it's released there
[06:52] <alkisg> So they usually have the version of software that shipped up to 1 year before their release
[06:52] <ouroumov> !latest | phoenixi
[06:52] <alkisg> "Rolling" distributions have more up to date software, but they're more unstable as well.
[06:53] <guest-nkA7NX> hey
[06:53] <alkisg> Hi
[06:53] <guest-nkA7NX> are you single
[06:54] <alkisg> ...go chat elsewhere, this is a support channel
[06:54] <guest-nkA7NX> oh realy? SRRY MAN
[07:43] <WattisLove> Hi. Why does some packages want to uninstall ubuntu-mate-desktop?
[07:52] <alkisg> WattisLove: Which package specifically and what command?
[07:53] <WattisLove> libreoffice, vlc, firefox, many of them really. Happens both with "apt-get remove" and "apt-get purge"
[07:53] <WattisLove> alkisg ^
[07:54] <alkisg> A desktop environment consists/depends on some packages
[07:54] <alkisg> Run this: apt show ubuntu-mate-desktop
[07:54] <alkisg> See the "Depends" line
[07:54] <WattisLove> but not the other way around, right? I'm only changing a program version. Why do I have to remove the whole desktop environment as well?
[07:55] <WattisLove> Depends line is very large
[07:55] <alkisg> If any of those packages is removed, then mate will be uninstalled too
[07:55] <alkisg> If that line was "Recommends:" instead, then you would be able to uninstall any of them without issues
[07:56] <WattisLove> So I can't change versions/replace programs/uninstall unwanted programs at all?
[07:56] <ouroumov> alkisg, I'm pretty sure those are meta-packages
[07:57] <ouroumov> And that they are safe to remove (read it on the forum on several threads)
[07:57] <alkisg> ouroumov, WattisLove, it depends
[07:57] <alkisg> If one installs mate, which then installs firefox etc,
[07:57] <alkisg> and then removes firefox, which then uninstalls the mate metapackage,
[07:57] <WattisLove> It wasn't like this in 14.04, I could uninstall programs right out of the box. BTW ouroumov you're brining back memories
[07:57] <alkisg> all is fine up to that point,
[07:57] <alkisg> *but*
[07:58] <alkisg> if after that, someone does: apt purge --auto-remove, to automatically clean packages,
[07:58] <alkisg> then all other packages in Depends will be uninstalled too
[07:58] <ouroumov> uh
[07:58] <alkisg> And that will be a big, unexpected mess
[07:58] <WattisLove> that sounds scary as hell
[07:58] <alkisg> So, what one can do, is mark all of them as manually installed
[07:58] <alkisg> I.e. `apt install firefox vlc etc etc`
[07:58] <alkisg> then autoremove won't remove them even if the metapackage is removed
[07:59] <WattisLove> If I apt-get install any of those packages I get "already newest version", does that count as marking them as menually installed?
[08:00] <alkisg> In previous versions, apt install marked the package as manually installed,
[08:00] <alkisg> I don't have time to check currently, if that's not the case anymore, some other command will be needed to mark them
[08:00] <WattisLove> ah, you're saying "apt install" not "apt-get install" alkisg ?
[08:01] <alkisg> It's the same now in 16.04
[08:01] <WattisLove> alkisg, isn't this some sort of bug? I don't think they planned it to be this way (either the ubuntu or the mate devs) or did they?
[08:01] <alkisg> They did
[08:01] <alkisg> E.g. suppose you have lubuntu and you want to try mate
[08:02] <alkisg> You install the mate metapackage, then remove it, then autoremove packages, and you're left with what you had previously
[08:02] <alkisg> If autoremove didn't work that way, you would have a hard time uninstalling desktop environments
[08:02] <alkisg> What is debatable is "Depends" vs "Recommends"
[08:02] <WattisLove> But couldn't they make it different for those who downloaded the OS instead of instaling it on top of their current DE?
[08:02] <alkisg> If mate recommented firefox, then you would be able to uninstall it without also losing the metapackage
[08:03] <alkisg> No, it would be the same however the installed the DE
[08:03] <WattisLove> Isn't there some verified fix posted somewhere? I really need to downgrade libreoffice. What way should I take?
[08:04] <alkisg> You don't need to uninstall it in order to downgrade it
[08:04] <alkisg> You can just apt install libreoffice=specific-version
[08:04] <WattisLove> there are no other versions available
[08:04] <alkisg> That won't remove the metapackage
[08:04] <alkisg> How were you planning to install the previous version?
[08:04] <alkisg> Won't you use some ppa or .deb package?
[08:04] <WattisLove> exactly like you said above
[08:05] <alkisg> Then the apt line will still work without removing the metapackag
[08:05] <alkisg> e
[08:05] <alkisg> I.e. just don't run `apt remove`
[08:05] <alkisg> Install whatever you like, maybe even apt pin it, but don't remove it
[08:05] <WattisLove> I checked for other available versions with showpkg or something like that but there were none, actually there are no older versions for any other packages
[08:06] <WattisLove> So the only option is to manually download the older version, uninstall the current one and install the other, but I didn't expect these complications
[08:07] <alkisg> You can install a deb without removing the package first
[08:07] <alkisg> It will downgrade the package without removing the metapackage
[08:07] <alkisg> "uninstall the current one and install the other" ==> i.e. only do the "install the other" part
[08:08] <WattisLove> ok, that makes me really feel better. But what if I needed to replace libreoffice with openoffice? to avoid conflicts one has to be uninstalled. What would I do in that case?
[08:09] <alkisg> You could mark all packages as manually installed, or not ever run autoremove, or file a bug report to mate so that they're recommented and not depended upon
[08:10] <WattisLove> let me see, so if I mark all those Depends pkgs as Manually installed, I would be able to remove any of them, is that correct?
[08:10] <alkisg> Yes
[08:11] <WattisLove> ok, how do I quickly mark all of them as that?
[08:11] <alkisg> previously it was apt-get install packages
[08:11] <alkisg> I don't know if anything changed in 16.04, please google it, I don't have much time now, multitasking too much... :)
[08:11] <WattisLove> ok, thank you
[08:13] <alkisg> You're welcome
[08:13] <WattisLove> I think I'm gonna file that bug report anyway cause this is really grave. I was seconds away from screwing up my system like never before and I'm quite sure other newbies  have suffered the consequences already. Where do I go to file it?
[08:15] <alkisg> !bug
[08:18] <gordonjcp> WattisLove: it's not a bug
[08:19] <WattisLove> a feature?
[08:19] <gordonjcp> well, it's a design decision
[08:19] <gordonjcp> there's no good reason to remove libreoffice
[08:20] <WattisLove> my reasons aren't good reasons?
[08:20] <gordonjcp> there are subtle distinctions between what would happen if it was in "Depends" or "Recommends" clause
[08:20] <gordonjcp> WattisLove: well, why do you want to remove it?
[08:21] <WattisLove> if I was to replace it with openoffice. Not only that, you should be able to remove software you don't use or replace it by your preferred programs
[08:23] <Switches> 'sudo apt remove libreoffice libreoffice-common' removes almost all of it bar for a few libs that other apps use (can't remember which ones they were though)
[08:24] <gordonjcp> WattisLove: you'd be able to use dpkg rather than apt to remove the specific package
[08:24] <gordonjcp> WattisLove:  you may then need to create a dummy package to fix the dependency, which is a bit messy
[08:24] <gordonjcp> WattisLove: or you could modify your OpenOffice package to satisfy the LibreOffice dependency
[08:26] <WattisLove> what I can't do, shockingly, is uninstall packages like it's always been done
[08:27] <alkisg> https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html
[08:27] <alkisg>  Recommends   This declares a strong, but not absolute, dependency.    The Recommends field should list packages that would be found together with this one in all but unusual installations.
[08:27] <alkisg> I think that this matches quite well what libreoffice is for mate
[08:27] <alkisg> I.e. IMHO, it should be recommented, not depended upon
[08:28] <WattisLove> agreed
[08:28] <alkisg> Unfortunately there are some distros that don't respect that, or disable the installation of recommented packages by default (like mint),
[08:28] <alkisg> and thus the developers sometimes resort to "Depends" to solve those other issues
[08:28] <gordonjcp> alkisg: one of the Frequently Whined About Questions with Kicad is why doesn't it have any libraries
[08:29] <alkisg> I.e. apt install mate-desktop on mint, wouldn't install any of the recommented packages, because mint decided to use 'no-install-recommends' in apt
[08:30] <WattisLove> So marking them as recommended to avoid the mess isn't possible in Ubuntu16-based Mint distros?
[08:30] <alkisg> (so again IMHO, the mint distribution integration is really problematic)
[08:30] <alkisg> Another bug report would be needed there, in mint, to respect the debian policy and apt defaults
[08:31] <WattisLove> I'm so glad I didn't download mint 17.3 (the latest one)
[08:31] <alkisg> But mint uses custom scripts to generate the CDs anyway, so it would be easy to just install mate with --install-recommends on cd build time
[08:34] <gordonjcp> there are good arguments for *not* installing recommends, too
[08:34] <gordonjcp> there's good arguments either way
[08:35] <gordonjcp> it's fine if you know what you're doing
[08:35] <alkisg> debian policy, apt defaults, should be reflected in distros, and sysadmins/users should be able to override those that they're allowed to
[08:35] <gordonjcp> WattisLove: anyway to go back to what you wanted to do
[08:36] <gordonjcp> WattisLove: look at the Depends and Recommends for Libreoffice
[08:36] <gordonjcp> WattisLove: then use dpkg to remove them, instead of apt
[08:36] <gordonjcp> WattisLove: you can pass something like "--no-depends" to it, can't remember the exact syntax
[08:36] <alkisg> gordonjcp: running apt after using dpkg still has issues
[08:36] <alkisg> E.g. upgrading mate-desktop will force libreoffice reinstallation
[08:37] <WattisLove> I've never had success with dpkg, not once. I'll try marking pkgs as manually installed. I'm reading about this command "apt-mark" now
[08:37] <alkisg> Anyway, /me goes afk for a bit...
[08:37] <gordonjcp> alkisg: yeah, you need to install a dummy package
[08:38] <gordonjcp> I don't think there's any real downside to installing Libreoffice *and* OpenOffice
[08:38] <WattisLove> there's a problem with "soffice"
[08:48] <gordonjcp> WattisLove: what kind of problem?
[08:50] <WattisLove> link issues I think.
[08:50] <WattisLove> https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=62509
[08:51] <WattisLove> "When installing, both programs write the soffice core program link in /usr/bin/. This conflict prevents both programs from installation in Ubuntu. You will get an error trying to overwrite /usr/bin/soffice."
[08:58] <gordonjcp> so you move /usr/bin/soffice
[09:06] <alkisg> If it's marked with dpkg, moving it won't help, dpkg-divert will be needed
[09:07] <WattisLove> I just don't like the word "conflict"
[09:11] <gordonjcp> alkisg: true
[11:24] <Casablanca> goodbye
[12:41] <dave30> hi im looking for help with awk, any1?
[12:47] <alkisg> There's a dedicated #awk channel for that
[12:50] <dave30> thanks :)
[13:22] <jeroen__> Hello world :-)
[13:24] <jeroen__> I am new to Linux and the ubuntu mate distribution. I just installed it and im having fun exploring the ins and outs. Is it possible to install office 365 applications on a ubuntu device?
[13:24] <ouroumov_> No idea, but I doubt it
[13:26] <jeroen__> ah ok, LibreOffice is the alternative?
[13:26] <ouroumov_> yes
[13:26] <jeroen__> ok thanks
[13:33] <sixwheeledbeast> LibreOffice works fine, if Office is necessary try running in Wine. Alternatively I believe Office 365 will work in most web browsers now.
[13:59] <Dummie_badger> Hi, could somebody help me a little bit with my mate, I can only run it on live, and it-s freaking me on.
[13:59] <Dummie_badger> thanks
[14:01] <ubuntu-mate_> hi
[14:01] <Dummie_badger> wazzup,can you help me?
[14:02] <ubuntu-mate_> I gess not, I have the same issue badger
[14:17] <WattisLove> Hey alkisg you there?
[14:17] <alkisg> Hi WattisLove
[14:18] <WattisLove> Hi. When you told me about metapackage problem earlier (or yesturday depending on where you are) you were talking about latest (16) version, right?
[14:19] <alkisg> Yes, but also in general
[14:19] <WattisLove> cause I tried removing the ubuntu-mate-core and ubuntu-mate-desktop metapackage to see if autoremove would list all those Depend's, and I didn't see any
[14:19] <WattisLove> Does it happen to you if you remove those packages?
[14:19] <alkisg> There's a possibility that `tasksel` was used to create the live cd, in which case the related packages were already marked as "manually installed"
[14:20] <alkisg> This isn't the case if `apt install mate-desktop` is used instead
[14:20] <alkisg> I haven't checked, I was speaking in general about metapackages
[14:20] <alkisg> You can just check if the packages are marked as manually installed or not
[14:20] <alkisg> If they're manually installed, they won't get autoremoved
[14:26] <alkisg> $ apt-mark showauto $(apt-cache show ubuntu-mate-desktop | grep Depends: | tr -d ,)
[14:26] <alkisg> WattisLove: this returns nothing on my 16.04, so they're marked as manually installed, by tasksel or something similar
[14:27] <alkisg> $ apt-mark showauto $(apt-cache show linux-generic | grep Depends: | tr -d ,)
[14:27] <alkisg> linux-headers-generic
[14:27] <alkisg> linux-image-generic
[14:27] <WattisLove> alkisg, so this does not only depend on the Depend list but also on how they're marked out of the box?
[14:28] <alkisg> On the other hand, removing for example the "linux-generic" metapackage, will later on auto-remove linux-headers-generic and linux-image-generic
[14:28] <alkisg> WattisLove: yes, it is possible to mark any package as manually installed, either by using apt-mark yourself, or by using tasksel, or whatever else the live cd mechanism uses
[14:30] <WattisLove> quick question: where and how did you learn so much linux? if you're a programmer/sysadmin don't answer
[14:31] <alkisg> Both :)
[14:34] <WattisLove> Just tell me something. The output from your last commands is from your computer and not mine. RIGHT?
[14:34] <alkisg> Haha, yes
[14:34] <WattisLove> phew
[14:34] <WattisLove> When I tried the apt-mark showmanual the list was so long I was esceptical it was showing me the real ammoung of manual pkgs
[14:35] <WattisLove> *ammount
[16:19] <__CoolGuy> Hi
[16:23] <__CoolGuy> The Thunar Windows manager doesn't work properly. It closes, and with no reason; when I press ctl+v to paste files.
[16:23] <__CoolGuy> Any suggestions other than using Caja?
[17:33] <Langley> Hello, how do I get rid of that damn "must restart to apply updates" nagging
[17:41] <teward> Langley: by restarting, or disabling automated updates - it's saying you have to restart so you can boot into updated kernels which received patches
[17:44] <Langley> There should be an option to disable it. It keeps nagging every 5 minutes
[18:00] <gthoo_> Hello. I have an thinkpad 260 and my mouse pointer is jumping around sometimes if I leftclick , but it jumps back around where it was before i clicked. Does anyone know what I can do to fix it?
[18:32] <Nowayz> Hey guys
[18:33] <Nowayz> Quick question, I have "single" listed in the cmdline.txt which I thought was booting emergency.target, but my changes to emergency.service don't seem to be doing anything, anybody know what that flag does?
[18:42] <Nowayz> I'm booting with "single" argument in the kernel arguments which I thought was using emergency.target and emergency.service, but changes to emergency.service don't seem to be changing anything.  Anybody know what target is booting with single in kernel arguments??
[19:10] <Langley> Help, after updating my system now takes a billion year at that Plymouth loading screen, then goes to emergency mode
[19:14] <Nowayz> can you get out of emergency mode
[19:17] <Langley> How?
[19:45] <Langley> Oh I think I know... must be additions I made to fstab
[19:47] <Langley> But why...
[19:50] <Langley> Is there any other way to auto mount hard drives?
[19:53] <Langley> Oh I got it, I guess writing about it helps. Thanks
[22:58] <Erige> Hello everyone. I am currently on Xubuntu, wanting to jump over to mate the live cd seemed to be more of what I am looking for. Is there a way I can migrate over to Ubuntu Mate without causing to many isses or would installing from live usb be the better option
[23:15] <nomic> they are different OS s .. would think that the xubuntu filing system mounts from mate, I would make my xubuntu a small partition to (using gparted), squeeze it down
[23:15] <nomic> then install mate into the free space
[23:15] <nomic> so you still have your ubuntu running, & can access the files on it from mate
[23:16] <nomic> ok
[23:16] <nomic> left.
[23:16]  * nomic runs ubuntu/mate
[23:16] <nomic> xubuntu /mate
[23:59] <rvazquez> are their keyboard shortcuts to move windows like in win8/10??
[23:59] <ouroumov> hi RadioNic1
[23:59] <ouroumov> hi rvazquez