[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Manually reported answer: viewer for X.509 certificate by vite11 on askubuntu.com

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Potentially bad keyword in answer, blacklisted user: viewer for X.509 certificate by vite11 on askubuntu.com

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title, blacklisted website in body, link at end of body: It's far however, most crucial DSN Code Black by maryfoster on askubuntu.com

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title, blacklisted website in body, blacklisted website in title, link at end of body: Read!! snaptube.zone/be-sarir-ek-jiv-ganay-prakash-thakor-mp3-song-download/ by Jayrivera on askubuntu.com

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] URL-only title, bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title, bad keyword in username, blacklisted website in body, +4 more: healthcares.com.au/geneticore-boost/ by Geneticore Boost on askubuntu.com

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Blacklisted username: Ubuntu 17.10 with Gitlab and Nginx (ha!) by It support on askubuntu.com

I think this is not actually a duplicate. Nothing special has to be done and no PPA has to be used -- Firefox Quantum is already issued as a security update because the Ubuntu maintainers for firefox generally don't issue updated versions of it with security fixes backported, but instead simply package the newest stable version when it contains security fixes, which this does. The question is correctly answered.

NAA, or very close to it.

VTRO & VTD

Is it clear on the question why it's not a dupe? Or is another comment needed?

Another comment would probably help, since OP agreed it was a dupe

which might make reviewers think it was correctly duped

I've commented. But does my comment make sense?

that's a great comment, thanks!

I don't think this question contains multiple questions. I suppose it could be considered unclear but I am fairly sure the problem is case sensitivity. But isn't there a dupe target for this?

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Blacklisted username: Ubuntu 17.10 with Gitlab and Nginx (ha!) by It support on askubuntu.com

This is a good point. Should I edit Elder Geek's answer? Comment? Assuming the question is reopened, should someone post a second answer? As the OP says, the current answer doesn't say to just install updates, even though it was edited to mention that the version is in the official repos. Most people may not understand the answer as indicating that it's sufficient to install updates.

@Videonauth You had mentioned it in a comment. Assuming the question gets reopened, do you want to post an answer on it saying just to install updates normally, mentioning the main ways to do it (and probably describing at least one of them), and explaining why this is sufficient? I think that this is probably the best outcome.

@EliahKagan the update to the existing answer could be made more prominent as well as another answer being posted

@Videonauth in a comment on this question you mentioned installing git-all. Do you know if this issue has been fixed?

(I'm just wondering about this)

can we edit that question ^ and suggest OP post an answer or something, or dupe it to something more relevant?

@Zanna Am I missing something here? It seems to me that there is no way that the current duplicate status and the top answer on the linked question could ever help anyone learn that they'll get Firefox Quantum as an update who didn't know it already.

I think David Foerster means that this answer says that you only need to perform a normal update (possibly more clearly than Elder Geek's answer)

Right but:

> he latest version of Firefox is available for as a security updates

If a Firefox update came out that didn't patch security bugs, it wouldn't be officially packaged for Ubuntu by the Ubuntu maintainers.

Nobody thinks of Firefox Quantum mainly as a security update, and only people who are highly familiar with it or happen to have heard someone mention that benefit know that this is even one of the functions the update serves.

right

Is every version of Firefox that is ever released a security update? If so, the answer on the current master question can be slightly expanded to state this explicitly and include a reference for it, and then this question can be kept a duplicate (or re-closed as one) and I imagine some other questions on the site can be similarly closed. But I am not aware of any policy that Firefox holds off on feature enhancements for the purpose of tacking them on to security bug fixes. Is there one?

not that I know of!

Is this really a duplicate?

Since it's in the reopen queue I'll correct the title before worrying about anything else

@Zanna That would almost ensure it wouldn't be reopened, right? Won't that make it look like it's only been enqueued due to the edit?

oh damn...

Arguably the worse problem is that I voted to reopen it. If it's dequeued but the OP edits it later after deciding they do want advice specific to their existing code, I believe that will not requeue it.

If it was homework, then it would be much better to help them with their code than to give them a finished answer to the original problem

As far as I'm concerned, if anybody wants to post an answer, that's reason enough to reopen it. Questions aren't mainly for their authors. Personally I don't feel like answering it, which is why I haven't brought up that angle. If nobody wants to answer it and the OP has what they want then it's probably not a problem.

Similarly, because questions aren't mainly for their authors, I don't think it possibly being for homework is itself decisive in whether or not to reopen it.

This is also one of the reasons why a policy of prohibiting homework questions--or treating them differently in any way--would be foolish. Questions that don't even manage to ask a question are already closeable. For everything else... It's generally better to be a good student than a poor student, but that's rarely the main factor affected by answers on a site like Ask Ubuntu, with hugely effective search-engine optimization. The people who are most affected are often those we don't hear from.

yes I agree with all of those points

it looks like they are thinking from a different programming language :)

With all that said, another possible option is to post a new question that quotes the code. The license always permits this. OTOH that might just get closed as a duplicate of it. You'd have to state explicitly in the new (self-answered?) question that you want an explanation of why the code does not work and how the specific flaws in it can be fixed. I would consider this completely acceptable, but probably not as good as just reopening the existing question.

I don't know enough about it to fix and explain everything in their script, so, I don't want to answer it either :/

@Videonauth Update firefox to Firefox Quantum has been reopened. Do you feel like posting an answer?

Is this answer correct?

Dupe. (See comments on the target.)

@EliahKagan ehy doing an answer for this, the one from elder geek is good

comment answer detected...

@Zanna i would say comment that the op should post an answer if he has got it fixed, im a bit lost on that one, his problem is that he has no proper repository data, or no internet connection, or messed up network, or an other undescribed problem

@Videonauth Well the issue is that it doesn't actually say to install updates. I had taken that as implied when I first read it but the OP pointed out that it doesn't really advise this, and users who actually need an answer to that question will likely not know that. You definitely don't have to post an answer, though, I just had thought you might happen to want to. Anyone can post a new answer, or editing the existing one is an option.

@Zanna I've commented.

thanks :) sometimes oldfred responds to those requests with some links to similar posts, at least

well i had my fair share of controversy on that downgrade question, and im still upset that hey dont want to downgrade you want to use xx from ppa y instead is top voted answer :)

and like this we should answer too

Your answer is good, and I have upvoted it, though I do suggest adding a warning about security, even though readers will often notice one in comments on the question or in the other answer. But answers that recommend an alternative approach to the underlying problem are absolutely appropriate. The other answer is a case of recommending another tool to solve a problem than the one the OP asked about, which is explicitly permitted and given as an example of a situation where NAA doesn't apply.

> The question is asking how to do something with one tool and the answer explains how to do it with another tool. This is still answering the basic question (How can I do X?), it is simply providing an alternative approach. Such cases should not be flagged at all.

(From this meta answer.)

yes i know, i stuck to unix scheme on this one because it is doable and to be honest i have firefox on hold, and probably will have untill 58 because two of my most used add-ons cant even produce an updated version because mozilla took out the api for doing what those add-ons do

and that is handling passwords within firefox own password safe

Related to the above: What is the XY problem?

@Videonauth I don't think we should withhold information about how to do dangerous things, but we should definitely warn that they are dangerous, and if there is a less dangerous way to achieve the same end, albeit indirectly or in a different way to what the asker expected, then I think that is a better answer, in general

all the other add-ons right now are cloud based online solutions

I love my add-ons :S

I don't really know what you mean by "stuck to the unix scheme." You cannot possibly mean that people should optimize against mitigating accidental harm in their personal interactions, or that documentation should fail to warn about prominent dangers, on the grounds that "It's not UNIX's job to stop you from shooting your foot." Do you actually mean that?

You seem annoyed by the other answer and how well it has been received. But do you really believe that it is wrong to recommend an alternative approach to the problem of plugin compatibility, which is what the OP stated was their actual goal?

> This is to have more time to wait for working replacements for legacy extensions.

ok i meant, what i described in my methapher on the island, sure we should warn about the possible dangers of not getting upgrades for the time the package is on hold, but really it is exaggerated here if someone wants to simply go on with the add.ons he has it is fine and unless they discover a major breach in firefox itself should be safe

might be that im more anoyed by the fact this user went around and downvoted all other answers because he thinks his is the only rihgt way to approach things even if he didnt address the question completely genuine

and that the other answer below mine only got one upvote till now and a bunch of downvotes even if he simply points out another way how to solve this

@EliahKagan hmm some of the Unix & Linux folks might know if it is...

I don't know exactly what you mean by "major breach," but Firefox 57 fixes two security vulnerabilities whose impact is shown in the release notes as critical.

I think answers saying how to hold Firefox back shouldn't be downvoted, and in fact I have upvoted such an answer (yours). But I think the view that they should be downvoted because they recommend an unnecessary security risk is a reasonable opinion, even though it's not my opinion. This isn't like if someone downvoted all answers that suggest installing packages with the letter "q" in their names. Though I disagree with them, the downvotes seem clearly to have been cast in good faith.

well i just revised my text

and tbh i think this answer should at least be par with mine askubuntu.com/a/977176/522934

it just points out a diffferent way of doing it

seems OT to me

@Zanna I've been a little more cautious about using the general programming for off-topic - someone pinged my for marking largish scripts as being off-topic, and although this seems more like a homework question, simplistic c programs seem a lot like doing scripts to me.

@CharlesGreen in this case i agree with @Zanna, this question would be a better fit for SO in its current state

Bash scripting is an exception. "explain some stuff in C" is off-topic, unless there's some specific relevance to Ubuntu (like, the problem occurs because the program is being run in an Ubuntu environment, or it's about developing Ubuntu itself)

@Zanna Its author has posted an answer.

that's awesome!!

The ping script question we were talking about earlier was reopened and the original merged to it. The comments were moved over and make no sense... But otherwise, good to see...

@Zanna isnt that maybe a duplicate of the one you answered? askubuntu.com/q/977486/522934

hmm which one are you thinking of? Apparently my memory is really really bad...

or at least very closely related

oh... it doesn't seem like a dupe of that one to me...

ok

I'm not at my proper height atm, having a bad cold, maybe a flu, with dysentery and all what comes with it

hmm get well soon!

hahahaha : Send bugreports, fixes, enhancements, t-shirts, money, beer & pizza to screen-devel@gnu.org

when you start up screen

:)

surely a dupe but I can't find a target that I'm sure is valid... I don't know much about this topic

you think my comment here is appropiate?

yes definitely

@Zanna They've posted their answer.

@Videonauth I think that is NAA

@EliahKagan thanks :)

@Zanna Ok. i thought im wrong here, to be honest i have read the question three times, ine time in review and two times on review for this answer

@Videonauth Yes. I've added another comment though, to try to make the situation clearer.

ok

just wanted a second or third pair of eyes on that

Are some of these dupes of one another, or of another question recommending a newer PPA? That may not necessarily be the best search term. This is the context.

not sure which to dupe to which, maybe zanna has some thoughts there

i think grovveplex evaluation is wrong here this is IMHO an honest attempt on answering. maybe not very good phrased but still (askubuntu.com/review/low-quality-posts/777035)

any thoughts?

nvm it was more a comment on an existing answer

Oh I ran out of comment upvotes... apparently that's where the day went!

hahaha, i have this happen so often, that i run out of overall votes

only votes left are some close votes possible and delete votes

that's great. I should vote more on posts.

yes i think votes are to rarely given out somehow

sure if somethings bad i dont vote ot i downvote, but if an answer is structured and includes already a lot information others might ask for then u upvote it

@EliahKagan that looks like a difficult conversation :(

is there any point in this answer or is it effectively the same as that one?

Isn't that a different PPA?

So unless there was never any PPA called that, and it's just a copy with a typo, I don't think it's the same at all.

oh yeah O.o

um no totally different

Hmm?

the answer is different and I was totally wrong :)

Oh. Sorry, I didn't see the original version of your message.

my bad, sorry. Telegram is doing weird things and I wasn't paying enough attention to clarify my message

no longer needed (That answer doesn't even give the same procedure as any of the others. The second line doesn't appear elsewhere in the page.)

and again

this answer seems at least partly wrong... Can it be fixed?

I think this question can be closed as a duplicate of this one assuming there isn't a question they should both be closed against

@Zanna i think installing python-dev will install python too so its not plain wrong but dev libs are usually not needed

I mean, that grep won't find "dependencies" of the package

@Zanna depends on your ubuntu, for 17.10 use grep python3.6

 $ dpkg -l | grep python3.6
ii  libpython3.6:amd64                         3.6.3-1ubuntu1                                             amd64        Shared Python runtime library (version 3.6)
ii  libpython3.6-dev:amd64                     3.6.3-1ubuntu1                                             amd64        Header files and a static library for Python (v3.6)
ii  libpython3.6-minimal:amd64                 3.6.3-1ubuntu1                                             amd64        Minimal subset of the Python language (version 3.6)

I mean, dependencies of a package might not have names similar to the name of the package (or command)

true that

for that you would have to apt show <package name>

and even dependencies can have dependencies so you still nt get the complete picture in some cases

but apparently that fixed it, so, what would have been a more reliable workflow?

or will it be enough here just to give a more accurate description?

Like "I removed all related packages found by doing dpkg -l | grep python3.5, then I purged them with this command, then I installed the python-dev package and everything was OK?

@Zanna should suffice

But I don't feel good about that... I think I'd still not want to upvote that answer. I'm very sceptical that it would help other people and I think it would probably do harm

... to people who only overwrote a symlink

which seems to me to be the actual problem they had before they started purging things? Apparently running as root the whole time?

Can this question be duped to something? Does 14.04 not include Python 3 in the default installation? If it does not, then the upvoted answer will get my upvote, and if it does, another answer might be needed...

@Zanna afaik 14.04 had python 2.7 as default

yes, but was a version of python 3 installed by default too, as in 16.04, 16.10, 17.04?

@Zanna uhhhhh give me about 30 minutes then i can tell you

searches the 14.04 disk image

oh gosh... I should find it myself... just being lazy hoping someone happens to know

found it, copying it from my nas right now then will install it in a VM

then i can dell you definitive

that's awesome! Thank you! Hopefully you will find some other uses for it. But I will have to leave all these tabs open and get the answer in the morning :)

oh in the worst case i kill it afterwards to fee up the space

oh fun, it does not want to play nice with KVM/Qemu

kernel panic

well finally lol

its installing

@Zanna well i give up on 14.04 installation, either my disk images are corrupted or it simply does not want to play nice with KVM/Qemu

They don't boot at all?

14.0.4 doesn boot and ends with kernel panic (i guess the image is corrupted)and 14.04.5 i just downloaded boots but tells me my QVM partition is corrupted ... and stalls while installation

well im going to have a cigarette now and then maybe try again when im done reinstalling 17.10 and 16.04 which i deleted by accident

on fresh install

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Pattern-matching website in answer: pdf to mobi convertor by Emma on askubuntu.com