Could we not change the boring background to something not specific to Purism but promoting, 'Security, Privacy, and Freedom'?

This issue seems possibly related to an issue in LibreOffice resolved today in debian (and thus not yet in PureOS) by tightening its dependency on apparmor: https://bugs.debian.org/918499

@mak Please have a look at this - smells AppStream-related.

I suspect that the line with UbuntuDrivers is totally unrelated and just a warning (despite the confusingly misleading initial word in captial letters).

In T660#12498, @jonas.smedegaard wrote:

@jeremiah.foster does it spew anything _after_ that error message about UbuntuDrivers?

@jeremiah.foster does it spew anything _after_ that error message about UbuntuDrivers?

In T660#12487, @jonas.smedegaard wrote:

On my machine;

ah - sorry, @EchedeyLR: Seems my window didn't refresh properly so I missed your latest response above. Thanks!

(me awaits responses from both @jeremiah.foster and @EchedeyLR for clarification, but suspects this issue is totally unrelated to that "UbuntuDrivers" message and instead the issue relates to AppStream...)

I experience the same issue.

@EchedeyLR What is the output of this command:

That pc is using a default installation.

@jeremiah.foster: Do you experience same issue, or do you talk about GNOME Applications because the stacktrace in the error message hints about it being tied to software-properties-gtk?

I tried open "Software & Updates" application from launchpad but It did not work. Then, I thought it was possible it returns some information trying run it from terminal and I did it and put the output into the description.

Sorry, I put it on task's name but not into description.

If understand from the subject that the error message mentions "UbuntuDrivers" but is that the applications that you attempted to run, or something else, @EchedeyLR ?

Apparently it can be used for configuring apt repos but I don't know that we need to have that in PureOS by default?

It is confusing for sure. :-)

...or @jeremiah.foster maybe you can clue me in here: What is "this particular piece of software" that you are talking about? Perhaps I am missing something obvoius here, but I am totally clueless right now :-/

Sorry, I don't follow: which applications are we talking about here?

A couple other issues with this particular piece of software;

• It is listed as being 'proprietary' software
• It won't run when one clicks on "launch" (see screenshot)

https://bugs.debian.org/919226 related

I have removed the 128 GB Intel SATA SSD and replaced it with a 500 GB Samsung 970 Evo NVMe M.2.
I did install PureOS from scratch and did not encounter any kernel panic.

This problem appears to be fixed with the update I made on 1/13/19. python3-libapparmor now has python3 << 3.8 and I am able to install this package. Above, I provided a link for a LibreOffice issue where this package was needed for debugging. That LibreOffice issue seems to also be fixed with this update.

It's working for me as well, thank you.

I saw that there was an AppArmor package update today from the pureOS repo so I upgraded it, and it seems to have fixed the issue. I can now launch LibreOffice successfully!

Thank you for this information and assistance. You make a good point on downloading the file. As paranoid as I am, it had not occurred to me, though I was really thinking in terms of editing my own file.

Hello everyone,

@jeremiah.foster, if the changes to the profile are few, could you post them so we can modify our profiles? Thanks. (And thanks for your post on this issue about the rolling release aspect in the forum topic.)

I have same problem. When I try to uninstall and install libreoffice-common, I get this messge :

I was having the same issue yesterday and also found AppArmor repeatedly mentioned in $ sudo journalctl | tail output, even after running:

Reopened the issue until it can be confirmed there is a fix in our repos.

On my system the Apparmor service simply doesn't start anymore and cannot be reloaded.

In T670#12428, @jeremiah.foster wrote:

So you get this message when you boot from your laptop? (I just want to make sure you're not booting from the USB stick.) Do you have the USB stick plugged in when you boot? If so, if you could remove it and then reboot and see what it says.

So you get this message when you boot from your laptop? (I just want to make sure you're not booting from the USB stick.) Do you have the USB stick plugged in when you boot? If so, if you could remove it and then reboot and see what it says.

In T670#12278, @jeremiah.foster wrote:

So, there is a kernel panic because the kernel can't seem to find a file system to mount. How did you install GNOME? Did you use a USB stick or an ISO or similar? Or are you using apt-get or some other means?

Hi Jeremiah,
No I still have issues ,I haven’t had any solution yet

Martial -- do you have more feedback? Have you been able to boot?

We need more feedback on this issue. Closing for now, re-open if necessary.

Thanks to Birin Sanchez for this work around, tested here with a slightly later version 6.0.5-2, and functioned as expected.

Please note the following append for LibreOffice Calc not starting (sigh).

I have a brandnew Librem 13 and installed the newest available PureOS version. Updated it in full and now it doesn't boot in normal or recovery mode, so I suppose it will be quite easy to replicate this issue..

I did experience the same kernel panic as described above with brand new laptop at several occasion:

reporting bugs is not an accurate science - it is highly appreciated that you filed a report when only suspecting a potential issue here, @Wayne !

I do not think there is a problem with either DuckDuckGo, without a more information, or the Purism Forums.

Looking at GNOME's Screenshot with Strace I don't see a call to external networking resources. Running this command;

@Wayne yes I meant to suggest that you file an issue (here on tracker.debian.net, not in the forum) about our forum triggering warnings about fingerprinting.

@jonas.smedegaard, if you meant for me to do so, I do not mind opening a new task for the Purism Forums. I think, however, others are better equipped to do so and would have more detailed debug information to write in the comments. But is it necessary? Part of my point was that indications from CanvasBlocker and others are not necessarily showing that anything nefarious is happening, though it may be worth noting.

DuckDuckGo is using jQuery functions that check canvas size. Are they actually tracking users? I would prefer not to jump to conclusions here. This makes me skeptical: https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/ad4h0u/duckduckgo_now_fingerprinting_visitors/

The video mentions specifically a couple of items;

1. Tor browser launcher not installed on device at default. (16:33)
2. httpseverywhere not isntalled (16:59)
3. Google is the default search engine (17:32)
4. Does using the default Wayland build change settings in the browser (comments re: 13:33)

Thanks for those details, @Wayne!

Here is another data point on fingerprinting in DuckDuckGo.

DuckDuckGo is no longer privacy-protecting: https://forums.whonix.org/t/duckduckgo-now-fingerprinting-visitors/6497/1

Thanks Wayne, I'm glad to hear you're not dead in the water. Thank you for your patience as well. Sadly I didn't have time to drill down and find out more about the situation with dependencies yesterday, I hope to try and get some clarity on this today, but no guarantees as its a weekend. :-)

Thanks. I understand now.

In T666#12337, @Wayne wrote:

I do not understand your last statement.

I don't know how many releases of python there were like that but I can't imagine many.

I do not understand your last statement.

@jeremiah.foster Yes, this is one of the possible use cases.

apt show hplip

shows, among other dependencies, this line;

wget, python3 (<< 3.7), xz-utils, python3 (>= 3.6~),

which seems to imply you won't be able to install this unless your python is higher or equal to version 3.6.* but not 3.7. I don't know how many releases of python there were like that but I can't imagine many.

Having an acceptance criteria (AC) in the issue might help, we can put it in the Description. Having an agreed upon "Definition of Done" is also useful and you've provided an example of DoD we can use, when the issue is in Green.

Just for the sake of clarity, you want to install PureOS on USB attached drive? So you're looking to have a persistent version of PureOS on the USB drive?