I can only speculate that it might be a Gnome-specific issue. I have no idea. I'm sure it'll be fixed eventually.

The wording has improved. Words such as GNU, Linux, Gnome, Plasma and distribution have been cleverly avoided, which is a good thing IMHO. A bit of redundancy is immediately obvious though. But overall it's going in the right direction. I'm pretty certain that 1 installer for both flavors is the right approach.

In T822#15824, @jeremiah.foster wrote:

This might be better addressed upstream, presumably uBlock Origin itself audits the remote lists?

Seemingly the Plasma flavor has received some love after all. Thank you so much!

Thank you for fixing it.

This has been pending for too long. We definitely need to do something about it asap. The product (excuse the mercantile formulation) needs to be polished from one end to the other. It would be more practical to have 1 installer for both flavors but that would result in confusion.

"Breeze" is the name of the default icon theme in Plasma. In the 1st screenshot we have PureBrowser and in the 2nd we have FF ESR from a different distribution featuring Plasma. @mak knows what I'm talking about (he used to have a distro called "Tanglu" that also had a Plasma flavor). Call me nitpicky but details matter.

Duplicate of T814

Although most security patches have been backported to 60.x, I'm pleading against reverting to 60.x because we will be missing out on important feature updates and other enhancements.

{F333687}Hmm. I only know that I had been previously able to access it without issues on Chromium with uBlock Origin and HTTPS Everywhere from Google As a side note, uBlock Origin from Google was significantly more tolerant to trackers. Needless to say that I don't intend to re-install Chromium or ever again get any add-ons from Google.

@mak Could you, please, package this thing in Amber so we can move on? Much appreciated in advance.

Please respect my unsubscribing from this issue. Please don't subscribe me again.

In T790#15491, @EchedeyLR wrote:

I think you were writing about https://kde.org/applications/internet/org.kde.ring-kde which is the KDE version of Ring/Jami

Until recently T814 we didn't know whether it was a PureBrowser issue or a Ublock issue. I think it is fair to assume that as soon as Ublock gets re-packaged in Amber, we can close this down. Some relevant aspects have been touched upon, although not strictly related to the task. A task should never diverge from its intended purpose or duplicate another task. It is indeed easier to merge than to split although enforcing separation is not always easy or even possible.

sudo dpkg -i webext-ublock-origin_1.19.0+dfsg-2_all.deb
[sudo] password for squid:
(Reading database ... 152660 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack webext-ublock-origin_1.19.0+dfsg-2_all.deb ...
Unpacking webext-ublock-origin (1.19.0+dfsg-2) over (1.18.4+dfsg-2) ...
Setting up webext-ublock-origin (1.19.0+dfsg-2) ...

I think it is unlikely that anyone in Purism staff will take on the task of packaging a fork of Chromium: Our priority is on a web browser usable both on desktops and phones, and the main contender there is GNOME Browser a.k.a. Epiphany.

Neither KDE nor Gnome can make browsers because neither of the 2 communities are in the browser business. Deny it! So it makes perfect sense to re-use the code base of either Firefox or Chromium with some adjustments. That's what all sane projects are doing. If you don't want to deal with Firefox anymore, then may I suggest making ungoogled-chromium the successor PureBrowser? I'm kindly submitting to your attention the following link and all the links within the link: https://chromium.woolyss.com/ Thank you.

You (or anyone else you might convince to take on the task) are recommended to get your browser of choice packaged for Debian officially. Then if it complies also with GNU guidelines it will automatically get included with PureOS as well.

T814

Until you've got something that is good enough to replace PureBrowser, you should absolutely fix PureBrowser. I've been thinking that Falkon is underdeveloped. Well, with all due respect, GNOME Web is even more underdeveloped. Are you even using it at all? Can we please think deeply and rationally for a second? Can we please not give in to our emotions and think from a technical perspective? Please have PureBrowser fixed! Close it down if it makes you happy but I suggest you leave it on the board. Thank you.

https://about.qwant.com/ +1

I've just checked GNOME Web and it is not ready for real-world usage. It is very basic and has absolutely no tracking protection whatsoever. Currently the only browser that is usable is Chromium. With Ublock from Google :-)

@todd If we can't deal with this issue in-house, maybe we should out-source it to people who specialize in browsers. What do you think?

In T821#15452, @jeremiah.foster wrote:

The plan is actually to deprecate PureBrowser as Mozilla doesn't share the same goals we put forward and that makes it a lot of work to ensure that our user's privacy is protected.

This is most likely not a coreboot issue. I tested on a machine that has proprietary firmware and memtest did not work.

Oops!

In T801#14990, @jeremiah.foster wrote:

Why?

I'm not sure whether the 2 issues are related or not. I should have authored a new task and cross-referenced.

Noticed the same reproducible sequence of events in:

Interesting. Might be related to Calamares.

@noe.nieto While you are at perfect liberty to install any flatpack you want, it is not in your best interest to install flatpacks that:

In T788#14927, @mak wrote:

Thank you for the feature request, but unfortunately we'll definitely not have cdrtools in PureOS.
There has been an old fight about its license change which I really don't want to start again. Also, the legal situation didn't really change and Debian, the FSF and Red Hat all agree on this particular legal issue.
Plus, to put it frankly, Jörg Schilling is one of the least fun upstream developers one could ever deal with.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cdrtools#License_compatibility_controversy for some abbreviated summary of the licensing issue.
You can use cdrkit to burn optical media, or just switch to the much more modern libburnia which is used by many open source projects: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libburnia
GNOME's Brasero is using libburn anyway.

@jonas.smedegaard Do you think it's worth packaging and if so who will be the maintainer?

@mak Can you make it happen?

In T792#14905, @gorgeous wrote:

I can do that, of course, but as I said already, this is happening for the 2nd time, after a new/clean installation from a USB flash drive with a PureOS8 ISO image. After installing some of the system updates, this issue appears. How can I be sure this would not happen again?

Thank you!

Silly me. It's already packaged. But it looks terrible in Plasma. It's a Gnome client.

Only if it does not conflict with Purism's philosophy.