[06:51] <sorinello> hello. is there any xfce app to add a system wide proxy in xubuntu ? or do I have to manually edit /etc/environment ?
[06:53] <flocculant> not that I know of
[06:55] <sorinello> just that... editing /etc/environment and rebooting the machine does not work
[06:58] <sorinello> all the examples I find are like: http_proxy=http://myproxyserver.com:80
[06:58] <sorinello> dunny if my proxy server is to be accessed using http 
[06:59] <flocculant> sorinello: no idea - pretty much something that should be in #x or if no-one answers there then #ubuntu 
[16:05] <flocculant> bluesabre: seems that our terminal is broken by https://github.com/gnunn1/tilix/issues/916
[16:06] <flocculant> more words in xfce-dev 
[16:09] <akxwi-dave> bugger
[16:10] <akxwi-dave> thats a big mess up
[16:24] <flocculant> well not broken by that gtihub issue itself - the change in packages does it :)
[16:37] <flocculant> now I'm not even sure where I got the updated terminal package from ...
[16:42] <flocculant> downgraded terminal for the moment
[16:42] <flocculant> that's driving me up the wall :)
[17:04] <flocculant> bluesabre: comments re terminal issue in https://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2017/05/16/%23xubuntu.html#t16:46
[17:04] <flocculant> from jbicha
[17:33] <cyphermox> wxl: you had asked about ip, IIRC. I just found out about 'ip -br addr' and 'ip -br link', if it helps :)
[17:42] <jbicha> cyphermox: could we get --color by default like:  ip a --color
[17:49] <cyphermox> jbicha: please file a bug, but I think we might as well leave that to users to alias as necessary
[17:49] <cyphermox> colors typically don't work all that great on some architectures, and some servers.
[19:44] <Unit193> flocculant: Did you file a bug in vte for that?  I don't see it.
[19:44] <Unit193> Would be nice if it wasn't prematurely updated, or even if it wasn't in main. :P
[19:44] <flocculant> Unit193: didn't do anything but install 0.8.4 so I could use it
[19:44] <Unit193> Ah.
[19:46] <flocculant> Unit193: I can do it now though if you want - report bug to what? terminal or something else?
[19:48] <flocculant> vte2.91 I assume?
[19:49] <flocculant> oh - so that doesn't work
[19:49] <flocculant> *shrug*
[19:52] <Unit193> flocculant: I thought you had already, if you haven't than no issue.
[19:53] <Unit193> (I was looking at 
[19:53] <Unit193> https://bugs.launchpad.net/~flocculant/+reportedbugs?field.searchtext=&search=Search&field.status%3Alist=NEW&field.status%3Alist=OPINION&field.status%3Alist=INVALID&field.status%3Alist=WONTFIX&field.status%3Alist=CONFIRMED&field.status%3Alist=TRIAGED&field.status%3Alist=INPROGRESS&field.status%3Alist=FIXCOMMITTED&field.status%3Alist=INCOMPLETE_WITH_RESPONSE&field.status%3Alist=INCOMPLETE_WITHOUT_RES
[19:53] <Unit193> PONSE&assignee_option=any&field.assignee=&field.bug_commenter=&field.subscriber=&field.structural_subscriber=&field.tag=&field.tags_combinator=ANY&field.status_upstream-empty-marker=1&field.has_cve.used=&field.omit_dupes.used=&field.omit_dupes=on&field.affects_me.used=&field.has_patch.used=&field.has_branches.used=&field.has_branches=on&field.has_no_branches.used=&field.has_no_branches=on&field.has_
[19:53] <Unit193> blueprints.used=&field.has_blueprints=on&field.has_no_blueprints.used=&field.has_no_blueprints=on&orderby=-id&start=0 in case someone already incorrectly marked it invalid.)
[19:53] <Unit193> Erm....
[19:53] <Unit193> Wow.
[19:53] <flocculant> what?
[19:54] <flocculant> I'd have told you if I reported something - you didn't need to ping me with my reported bugs :D
[19:55] <Unit193> Right, that's what I was looking at and didn't see it. :P
[19:55] <flocculant> :D
[19:55] <Unit193> And, url is tooooo loooong.
[19:55] <flocculant> indeed it is :)
[19:55] <flocculant> anyway - so do you want me to report it? and to what package and I'll do it now :)
[19:56] <Unit193> Nah, we'll just wait on LP 1636666
[19:57] <flocculant> but do something with terminal?
[19:57] <flocculant> in the meantime 
[19:57] <Unit193> Building now, want to test before I push?
[19:57] <flocculant> I can yup
[19:58] <flocculant> point me at it 
[20:05] <jbicha> Unit193: it's not a bug in vte2.91
[20:44] <Unit193> jbicha: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/vte2.91/0.48.2-0ubuntu1 would disagree with you, but not my point anyway...
[20:46] <jbicha> yes, but it's intentional
[20:47] <Unit193> Sure, but it's an intentional bug that breaks other things, thus still a bug in vte.
[20:49] <jbicha> all you have to do is patch xfce-terminal to not assume that vte 1.48 uses pcre2, change the check to vte 1.99 or whatever made-up number you want instead
[20:49] <Unit193> That's what I did...
[20:50] <jbicha> we'll eventually switch vte2.91 to pcre2 but the Security Team would rather that we postpone that for a while
[20:51] <jbicha> pcre2 got a very high showing in https://opensource.googleblog.com/2017/05/oss-fuzz-five-months-later-and.html :(
[21:00] <jbicha> https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/transitions/html/pcre2-main.html