![]() First, the repository you have used to install the app and second, the package name. However, to do that, we need more information. Command-LineĬommand-Line, basically, means using the terminal to uninstall an app. Let’s start with the command-line way first. In case you are not comfortable with the terminal, jump over to the GUI section which is frankly the easiest way to uninstall an app on Ubuntu. Generally, there are 2 ways to uninstall an app in Ubuntu – Command-Line or GUI. How to Uninstall An Application In Ubuntu ![]() So, covering all of these here’s a list of methods explaining how to uninstall an app in Ubuntu. These dozens of ways to install an app leads to multiple ways of uninstalling them as well. To top all of these, you can also sideload, compile, and install applications. You can also use the universal packaging method like Flatpak or AppImage. You can install an app from the Apt repository or the Snap repository. The most important reason being, there are multiple installation methods. This is something that should be handled by another ticket too but unfortunately since the actual bug why we are here does prevent to utilize XScreenSaver's DPMS at all more or less for some unknown reason makes it impossible to test how DPMS actually works to check if there is a feature request required or not.It’s always a pain to uninstall an application on Linux distros. Not sure if this is due to XScreenSaver being in charge of DPMS but maybe this should be handled in another ticket (so Jarno you could create another one and cc Jamie there).Īlso we have another feature request by me and Jarno how DPMS should be handled in special cases for example if the screen is locked (if it should ignore the users time settings or not etc.). Then we have another issue claimed by Jarno that xscreensaver-demo does not take care and don't update it's values/overwriting with old values if the DPMS settings were changed by other means. Correct me if I'm wrong with this conclusion. With Jamies claim that XScreenSaver needs to control DPMS and Jarno's claim that "Disable Screen Saver" also disables XScreenSaver's DPMS even if enabled in the "Advanced" tab of xscreensaver-demo I think you guys are talking about 2 different things while thinking to talk about the same thing making the confusion just perfect. ![]() I see no reason why selecting "Disable Screen Saver" should prevent kicking in DPMS at all as Jamie stated in comment #18 this is more or less a bug. > Could the "Disable Screen Saver" mode be changed to not change DPMS settings, when not locked? I think Jarno and Jamie are misunderstanding each other: I think the same thing could be done in "Blank Screen Only" mode, as user supposedly has different preferences for DPMS while being locked and while not. It should restore the old setting, when unlocking. However, IMO it would be good to change DPMS setting during locking in that mode so that it turns off display after small delay as there is no use for the display anyway. I mean it would be "Neither automatic screen saver nor automatic locker just let DPMS do its job, if enabled, and lock when requested" mode. That would also fix Bug #889397.Ĭould the "Disable Screen Saver" mode be changed to not change DPMS settings, when not locked? User could change them in the Advanced tab or elsewhere, if needed. I think it would help, if the preferences dialog had Apply button that would make the changes effective. Xfce Power Manager's monitor settings, if the DPMS settings are changed in the Xfce user interface. Could it be changed so that it will fill the values by current (X) settings, and change the settings only, if the change is explicitly made in the dialog? That way it would not mess with e.g. As for #16, is the XQueryExtension "DPMS" setting the one that can be controlled by 'xset +dpms' and 'xset -dpms'? Using the latter makes DPMS disabled, but as far as I switch to advanced tab (from another tab) in xscreensaver preferences (or possibly do another action in xscreensaver) the setting is changed to what xscreensaver remembers it was.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |