with a remotely exploitable
version of firefox? Just shrug it off and continue with your day?
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 8:32 AM, Gareth McCumskey
wrote:
>
>
> On Wednesday 23 June 2010 20:32:34 Nathan Dorfman wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Scott Kitterman
> wrote:
>>
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 4:25 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
>
> "Nathan Dorfman" wrote:
>
>>On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Nathan Dorfman" wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Wed, Jun 23,
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
>
> "Nathan Dorfman" wrote:
>
>>On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 10:46 AM, wrote:
>>> I think is very simple...that option can be added but not make it the
>>> default choice, so anyone that can
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 10:46 AM, wrote:
> I think is very simple...that option can be added but not make it the default
> choice, so anyone that can and want to activate it will be satisfied. We are
> just making Ubuntu richer in users' options.
I agree. This is exactly what I'm proposing. A
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 2:43 AM, Shane Fagan
wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-06-22 at 22:49 -0400, Nathan Dorfman wrote:
>> Personally, I would prefer it, and I think it's quite reasonable. Thoughts?
>>
>
> You have to remember that not everyone has broadband and not everyone
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 11:28 PM, Dylan McCall wrote:
> Keep in mind that checking for updates involves a non-trivial download
> of package lists from all repositories the user is subscribed to.
> Unfortunately, it is a much more intense operation than it appears.
>
A fair point, but I think that
Personally, I would prefer it, and I think it's quite reasonable. Thoughts?
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 7:57 AM, Mat Tomaszewski <
mat.tomaszew...@canonical.com> wrote:
> So this is actually the only good and valid point in this, otherwise
> exaggerated, rant.
>
> I'm currently reviewing the download process on Ubuntu.com and been
> looking into various help and support optio
On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 5:28 PM, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 11:27:02AM -0400, Nathan Dorfman wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:39 PM, Colin Watson wrote:
>> > (It's surprising that you apparently didn't see a dialog informing you
>> > th
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:39 PM, Colin Watson wrote:
> (It's surprising that you apparently didn't see a dialog informing you
> that the installer had crashed. It must have gone down pretty hard.)
Yup. I had no idea that it crashed until you just told me :) the same
thing occurred both times I ins
Update: just did a fresh install, using karmic-desktop-amd64.iso.
One more thing I just noticed is that after installation, it takes me
to the live desktop screen. Any idea why it does this? It takes a
little bit of time to load the desktop, just so I can reboot.
Shouldn't it offer to reboot after
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 1:51 AM, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 12:44:11PM -0400, Nathan Dorfman wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 5:18 AM, Evan Dandrea wrote:
>> > No, I just tested this myself and was unable to reproduce the behavior
>> > you exp
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 5:18 AM, Evan Dandrea wrote:
> No, I just tested this myself and was unable to reproduce the behavior
> you experienced. Are you sure the installation did not crash near the
> end, and enough of the system was in place to allow you to boot? You
> would not have seen the "i
Hi,
Just installed karmic alpha 2, and noticed that a few packages that
should have been removed at install are left behind.
These include gparted, ubiquity, casper and a couple of others.
Ubiquity's package description even states: Installing this package on
a normal system is unlikely to be use
14 matches
Mail list logo
