Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

Afternoon, gang.

Google's newest Chrome offering has just been released, so here's the Puppy-'portable' of v93.0.4577.82.

-----------------------------------

Bug-fixes, patches, workarounds, etc, can be found here, as always:-

https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2 ... sktop.html

-----------------------------------

The only change I've made is to move the 'PROFILE' directory back to the top level when it's created on the first run. After creation, you can (if required) delete the new profile, and drop/symlink your existing profile back into place.

Apart from that, everything's cool. Posting from it now.

-----------------------------------

If interested, as usual the download link can be found at the bottom of post #1.

Enjoy!

Mike.

Evening, kiddiwinks.

Now then; it's that time again. Chrome v94 has just been promoted to the stable channel, so here's the Puppy 'portable' version of v94.0.4606.54.

----------------------------------------------------

The usual crop of security 'fixes' - 19 of them, on this occasion - has been taken care of. You can read all about them here, as usual :-

https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2 ... op_21.html

----------------------------------------------------

Nothing of note to report this time; Google are just refining & trying to make Chrome better, as always. I'm often reading on the blog about how new versions of Chrome keep breaking functionality for Windows users, but none of this stuff ever really seems to affect us here in Puppyland....for which I'm grateful!

No changes to the packaging, either; I've settled on a format I'm happy with now, and for the foreseeable future, that's how it's going to stay.

---------------------------------------------------

You can find the new version at the main link in post #1. Any issues/ problems/feedback, drop me a line. Y'all know where to find me.

Enjoy!

Mike.

Just numbers for fun
Firefox 92 vs. Chrome 94 Browser Benchmarks On Ubuntu Linux

Hi mikewalsh,

I am running the following Puppy OS on my laptop:

Distro: LxPupSc64 19.09
Desktop Panel: lxpanel 0.10.0
Window Manager: Openbox 3.6.1
Desktop Start: xwin startlxde

It seems that most portables I have tried do not seem to run ( eg the latest chrome ) and require other dependencies, some of which are not available in the PPM. I would like to know if this is a typical outcome for slacko-based OS and is there anything I can do to work around the issue? I have tried a few things such as running the launch as --no-sandbox from the cli.

FYI I have very few problems with your portable apps at all in Bionicpup64, which is great.

@Geek3579 :-

There's two issues in play here.

One, yes; Slacko-based Puppies DO tend to need more in the way of extras added-in to the mix. This is nothing to do with the way they're built, more a legacy of Slackware's very conservative development policy, that of supplying just enough, OOTB, to get the OS functional. It's always then been up the user to install what else they want/need.

With regard to the Chromium-based browsers, current releases now want a newer libgtk-3.0. And it's not just a case of updating this single item; so far, my research shows that a hell of a lot of other stuff needs updating, too, including the glibc and various other 'base' items. You'd almost need to rebuild Puppy into a newer version of itself, unless I'm approaching it all wrong.

I've never yet been able to get Chromium-based 'clones' to make use of an included glibc 'tweak' upgrade, unfortunately. We've more or less reached the stage where they'll only run on newer Puppies....

(*shrug...*)

Mike.

Thanks mikewalsh.

I pretty much expected what you said, which is a pity, as LXSCPup64 provides a fine, fast and stable desktop which is otherwise perfect for daily use.

Since my last post above I re-read a post by ozsouth ( viewtopic.php?f=90&t=1341 ) which seemed to suggest that loading gtk+3 and libxkbcommon might solve a problem running Chrome 64bit RUN-AS-SPOT in SC64.

With nothing to lose I tried this with EDGE portable browser, using the LAUNCH_NL script. No idea why this worked, but it Worked like a charm !!! And some other portables worked also. Good news !!

Evening, gang.

Update time; here's the Puppy-portable version of v94.0.4606.71.

Bugfixes/patches/workarounds, here as usual:-

https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2 ... op_30.html

Operation & 'installation'/usage as previously; make certain to read the 'ReadMe' files before running it for the first time. You can find it at the usual link, bottom of post #1.

Enjoy!

Mike.

Afternoon, gang.

It's new release time again. Chrome 95 has now landed, so here's the Puppy-portable version of v95.0.4638.54.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Usual release info can be found here:-

https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2 ... op_19.html

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Google are now spewing out updates every few days as part of their "Accelerated update programme". This was not unexpected, as it was announced all the way back in April that this would become standard practice from Chrome 94 onwards. Well, I'm sorry, but I point-blank refuse to spend all my time doing nothing but browser updates; I do have a life, and other stuff that demands my time. This being the case, I'll be producing an initial version of each release, and a mid-point one. You'll have to be satisfied with that, guys.

I'm looking into producing some form of updater for the portables; very early stages yet, though, but I'll keep y'all informed if it ever materialises.

******************

Oh, YESSS.....

EDIT:- Well, that didn't take as long to figure out as I feared it might. Puppy's Chrome-portable now has its own, included updater script. Works nicely, too..!

As mentioned below in my reply to Barry, the script contents are there if anyone's curious.

The only thing I can't automate is to make it check for new updates; that's still way over my head, I'm sorry to say. However; since Google are now settling into a regular pattern of weekly updates for the Linux build, all you need to do is run the updater once a week. You can be pretty sure of having the newest version most of the time.

Occasionally, they forget to upload the new version, but that's only happened a handful of times in the years I've been building these browser packages. It's a pretty rare occurrence. If you want to check for update status yourselves, check out the Chrome blog.....it's the best source for news of new releases, across ALL platforms:-

https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/

99 times out of 100, the "Stable Channel for Linux" is usually mentioned somewhere in the first couple of pages...

I've re-built to include the new updater script in this release, re-packed, and re-uploaded. Which means you guys can take care of your own updates from now on....!!

--------------------------------------------------------------

The new release can be found at the usual location in post #1. As always; d/l; unzip; put the portable's directory anywhere you like, though preferably outside the 'save'. Click to enter, click the appropriate 'LAUNCH' script to fire it up. (The 'LaunchReadMe' will explain which one.)

Scripts permit the addition of a Menu entry if required. The 'MenuReadMe' explains how to use these.

Feedback on the operation of the new updater script would be appreciated over the coming weeks & months.

Enjoy, y'all.

Mike.

@mikewalsh
I am using Chrome on EasyOS for the first time. Created a SFS, see blog report:

https://bkhome.org/news/202110/chrome-9 ... eated.html

I thought that it would do automatic updates, so accustomed to that on my phone.

Then I read this thread, you are getting tired of creating new SFSs, so read more about updating ....automatic updating not available for Linux!!!!

Like you, I don't want to get stuck with having to create new SFSs. In theory, it could be automated, a script could download latest Chrome then build the SFS. Or maybe not even that, just download latest Chrome and replace /opt/google/chrome

@BarryK :-

Hallo, Barry!

Actually, you've pre-empted me on this one, y'know?

I had some unplanned spare time this afternoon, and, having mentioned about the substantial increase in the number of upcoming "official" updates - and that I'd be looking into building an updater for these portables of mine - I figured I may as well tackle it now as later. Turned out it wasn't as hard as I thought.

I've done exactly what you've just suggested; I've simply concentrated on replacing the main 'chrome' directory. The way these portables are built, I've tried to make them as modular as possible, 'cos it makes MY life easier.

Turns out it wasn't so hard after all. The only tricky bit was tracking down the correct URL for wget to work with. The rest was pretty simple; it is, after all, just simple file manipulation.....creating, copying, moving, duplicating, deleting. First time I've really used the /tmp directory in anger, too..!

Custom, specific parts of the portable get copied out to /tmp prior to deleting & replacing the 'chrome' directory. Then, those bits of the 'chrome' directory that I don't want get removed, followed by replacing the portable-specific custom parts again.

Although a built-in updater has been standard on the Windows & Mac builds for a number of years, it's never existed for us on this side of the fence. I believe Google are in the process of providing one for the Linux builds ATM, but of course that won't work with custom builds like these portables.....only with distros that use the standard location in /opt. Hence why I've rolled my own.

------------------------------------------

If you're at all interested, here's the new updater script:-

#!/bin/sh
#
# Updater script for the Puppy 'Chrome-portable package...
#
HERE="$(dirname "$(readlink -f "$0")")"
#
# Download & extract the Google Chrome .deb package
#
mkdir /tmp/chromenew
mkdir /tmp/chromenew/files
#
wget https://dl.google.com/linux/direct/google-chrome-stable_current_amd64.deb
sleep 1
mv $HERE/google-chrome-stable_current_amd64.deb /tmp/chromenew
sleep 1
#
cd /tmp/chromenew
ar vx ./google-chrome-stable_current_amd64.deb
sleep 1
tar xvf ./data.tar.xz
#
# Copy files/directories to keep, then remove existing Chrome directory...
#
sleep 1
cp -R $HERE/chrome/lib /tmp/chromenew/files/lib
cp $HERE/chrome/chrome-pup /tmp/chromenew/files/chrome-pup
cp $HERE/chrome/chrome-pup_NL /tmp/chromenew/files/chrome-pup_NL
cp $HERE/chrome/product_logo_256.png /tmp/chromenew/files/product_logo_256.png
sleep 1.5
rm -rf $HERE/chrome
sleep 1.5
#
# Copy new Chrome directory into place, and make modifications...
#
cp -R /tmp/chromenew/opt/google/chrome $HERE/chrome
sleep 1
rm -rf $HERE/chrome/cron
rm $HERE/chrome/google-chrome
rm $HERE/chrome/product_logo_16.png $HERE/chrome/product_logo_24.png $HERE/chrome/product_logo_32.png $HERE/chrome/product_logo_32.xpm $HERE/chrome/product_logo_48.png $HERE/chrome/product_logo_64.png $HERE/chrome/product_logo_128.png $HERE/chrome/product_logo_256.png
#
# Replace Puppy-specific items...
#
sleep 1
cp -R /tmp/chromenew/files/lib $HERE/chrome/lib
cp /tmp/chromenew/files/chrome-pup $HERE/chrome/chrome-pup
cp /tmp/chromenew/files/chrome-pup_NL $HERE/chrome/chrome-pup_NL
cp /tmp/chromenew/files/product_logo_256.png $HERE/chrome/product_logo_256.png
sleep 1
rm -rf /tmp/chromenew
#
# Update complete.
#
/usr/lib/gtkdialog/box_splash -placement top -bg "#97D94A" -fg black -timeout 10 -text " Google_Chrome-portable has now been updated. 
                            Enjoy the new release.....!  "

Doubtless it could stand plenty of improvement - I'm under absolutely NO illusions as to my 'skill' level! - but for a first attempt at such a thing, it COULD be a lot worse; at least it does I want without hassle. I'm quite pleased with it..!

The beauty of doing it this way with the portable build is that it updates 'in-situ'. I'm not attempting to build a package out of it as well. You simply shut the browser down; run the updater and wait for it to finish; then re-launch the browser into its new version. Easy-peasy.

Mike.

mikewalsh wrote: Fri Oct 22, 2021 4:52 pm

The beauty of doing it this way with the portable build is that it updates 'in-situ'. I'm not attempting to build a package out of it as well. You simply shut the browser down; run the updater and wait for it to finish; then re-launch the browser into its new version. Easy-peasy.

Mike,
Great news!
I will do something like that also.

In my case, have kept the /opt/google/chrome path in the sfs.

Probably the most interesting thing about my sfs, is chrome will run as user 'chrome'. Instead of 'spot', I am running each app as its own user. This is very EasyOS-specific, the sfs can't be used on other pups as-is.

@BarryK :-

Well, of course, this is the way that 'zilla-based browsers have always updated. I suspect that it works the same way for Chrome under Windoze & Macs, though as I said, they've never had a Linux version.....yet.

I believe it may even be in progress now. Amongst others, I run the 'lite' spin jrb put together based on your Quirky 'April' 7.0.1; it was remastered with glibc 2.20, and until very recently, I've been using Chrome on that.....using a dedicated set of libs battleshooter helped me figure out, called via "LD_LIBRARY_PATH". After v91, however, it started complaining about needing a newer version of GTK3, and, looking into it, I then found out that a hell of a lot of other things also needed newer versions, too.....stuff that, unfortunately, would render it incompatible with Quirky.

So I keep a copy of v91-portable in its own dedicated folder, just for Quirky. Last time I was using it, around a week ago, I got a warning that it was out-of-date, and found something I'd never seen in the Linux build of Chrome.....a dedicated download/udate button on the 'About' page. I didn't use it, because I knew what it would do; try to install a 'standard' version of Chrome in the regular locations. This of course wouldn't work, because we can only run Chrome as 'spot'; Chrome won't have it any other way.....and that would go against the whole point of my running browsers as portables in the first place.

Google's reasoning has always been this; Windoze and Mac are easy to provide an updater for, because everybody runs the same version- due to the forced system updates - so things are always in the exact same location. Linux, on the other hand, has always been subject to distro builders customizing OSs to suit themselves, so there's a whole bunch of other places things go in. Google's logic says there's no point providing a Linux updater, since it won't work for everyone.

We'll see how this goes, I guess. At least my portable builds will now update; it might have to be triggered manually, but at least the ability is now there. And it doesn't take long; a couple of minutes at most.

It's all good practice.

Mike.

mikewalsh wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 12:05 pm

We'll see how this goes, I guess. At least my portable builds will now update; it might have to be triggered manually, but at least the ability is now there. And it doesn't take long; a couple of minutes at most.

It's all good practice.

Mike.

Would this updater eventually show up in Ungoogled Chromium? I'm guessing not since it's ungoogled. And of course that' the way I like it.
~geo

geo_c wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 2:33 pm

mikewalsh wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 12:05 pm

We'll see how this goes, I guess. At least my portable builds will now update; it might have to be triggered manually, but at least the ability is now there. And it doesn't take long; a couple of minutes at most.

It's all good practice.

Mike.

Would this updater eventually show up in Ungoogled Chromium? I'm guessing not since it's ungoogled. And of course that' the way I like it.
~geo

I wasn't intending to, no. Out of all the clones - and Chrome is still a clone of Chromium, 'cos that's where its source code comes from - it's the only one that has such a ferocious update schedule.

Marmaduke only releases Ungoogled Chromium occasionally. SRWare don't release Iron that often, either. Vivaldi, I don't know.....I've kinda given up on that one. Opera are fairly regular with updates; I like Opera, but their devs p**s me off by regularly moving Widevine & libffmpeg.so for no good reason, and then the Opera community chases its tail for 3 or 4 months till they figure out where it's got put THIS time, shortly after which the devs decide to move it again.....just for the hell of it, like!

So that's gotten the "bum's rush" for now, too. (Someone on the Opera dev team has, I think, got a warped sense of humour where Linux is concerned; why else keep moving stuff that doesn't need moving??)

No; other browsers, where they've got a sane release schedule, will just be released as & when.....as usual. Google's release schedule has become silly, and I refuse to pander to it. So, individuals can now take care of their own updates, WHERE they're fussed enough to feel the need to do so.

It's one less thing for me to worry about, mate!

EDIT:- I may do an updater for Slimjet.....and there again, I may not. I haven't decided yet.... Their schedule has a history of being somewhat erratic; from time to time, several releases come out in as many days, then there will be a huge gap till the next one makes an appearance. I don't know.

Mike.

mikewalsh wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 4:05 pm

geo_c wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 2:33 pm

Would this updater eventually show up in Ungoogled Chromium? I'm guessing not since it's ungoogled. And of course that' the way I like it.
~geo

I wasn't intending to, no. Out of all the clones - and Chrome is still a clone of Chromium, 'cos that's where its source code comes from - it's the only one that has such a ferocious update schedule.

Mike.

Well, I agree, the ferocious update schedule is a pain. I just updated to Ungoogled Chromium 94. And I have the system tweaked, thanks to your getcrx addon, I simply download your latest build, point my launcher icon to NL_launch, then drag my crx files into developer mode extension screen and I'm off and running.

@geo_c :-

Google have also introduced what they're calling the "Extended Stable Release". This is updated once every 2 months; kinda like a Chrome version of Firefox's ESR builds.....which is the version of Firefox I use, where it gets any use. (Quantum's release schedule is also getting a bit 'frantic' for my liking..!)

It's aimed more at enterprise users, it's true; again, where a more predictable, sane release schedule is required. I may look into producing a build of this.....again, with the updater script provided. I don't know, yet; we'll see.

Watch this space, is all I will say. EDIT:- Nah, scratch that. It's only for Windoze and Crapple. Oh, well.....

Mike.

Hi, gang.

Just wanted to let y'all know about the current emergency update.....released a couple of hours ago. This is to fix five "active" zero-days that have already been exploited in the wild.

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/g ... n-attacks/

Time to give the new update script its maiden voyage..!!

Mike.

Hi everyone,

Sadly, the last Chrome (95) doesn't work in Tahr64 6.0.5. At launch ejects this:

symbol lookup error: ../Google_Chrome-portable/chrome/lib/libgtk-3.so.0: undefined symbol: gdk__private__

If it's something trivial, please tell me what to do. If it's not, then that's it, end of an era (for me).
Tahr is the best for my configuration - somewhat powerful but old.
(info: chrome 91 from mike's repository performs very well)

LE: Oh, bummer, I think the answer is already here. I saw the second post on this page.

baraka wrote: Fri Oct 29, 2021 11:56 am

Hi everyone,

Sadly, the last Chrome (95) doesn't work in Tahr64 6.0.5. At launch ejects with this:

Code: Select all

symbol lookup error: ../Google_Chrome-portable/chrome/lib/libgtk-3.so.0: undefined symbol: gdk__private__

If it's something trivial, please tell me what to do. If it's not, then that's it, end of an era (for me).
Tahr is the best for my configuration - somewhat powerful but old.
(info: chrome 91 from mike's repository performs very well)

LE: Oh, bummer, I think the answer is already here. I saw the second post on this page.

Yah, I'm afraid Tahr is now simply too old to run the newest versions of Chrome. Not only does it need a newer GTK 3.0, but a ton of other stuff needs upgrading too.....including zlib, and upgrading that will break Tahr.....

Sorry an' all that. Don't shoot the messenger..!

Mike.

Right, gang.

One more re-upload of Chrome-portable. This is now the newest version, in response to the severe vulnerabilities mentioned above.....but it's primarily to do with functional improvements, to streamline operation of the portable.

Everything has now been moved out to the top level, in the same way as I've done with the 'zillas. The 'lib' directory is now at the top level. The wrapper-scripts have been moved out, and combined with the 'LAUNCH' scripts.....in effect, the launchers now ARE the wrapper-scripts.

Oscar showed this was possible with his Iron & Slimjet builds, a few years ago. The wrappers don't HAVE to be inside the browser directory; so long as they point to the correct locations, all is tickety-boo. I'd forgotten about this....

This means that the updater script can now be simplified, too, so that's also been modified. Hopefully, this thing SHOULD be self-maintaining for the forseeable future; just remember to run the updater script once a week. If desired, you can check for the current version at Google's Chrome blog:-

https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/

.....because sometimes they'll release updates more often, if serious vulnerabilities are discovered.

I'll be making similar modifications to the other clones, as & when updates come around.

------------------------------------------------

The new build can be found at the usual location in post #1. D/l; unzip; move the portable anywhere you like, though preferably outside the 'save'. Click to enter, click the appropriate 'LAUNCH' script to fire it up. Easy-peasy.

Enjoy.

Mike.

Quote : It's Fun.

That is why we all use Linux and Puppylinux in particular to begin with.

It's running, man, chrome 95 explodes in tahr64_6.0.5.
Just install libgtk-3.0 from Mike's collection like a pet. If you make a sfs from it, as I did, chrome doesn't start (let it remain a mystery).
Many thanks!

@baraka :-

baraka wrote: Sat Oct 30, 2021 6:27 am

It's running, man, chrome 95 explodes in tahr64_6.0.5.
Just install libgtk-3.0 from Mike's collection like a pet. If you make a sfs from it, as I did, chrome doesn't start (let it remain a mystery).
Many thanks!

"Explodes"..?? Uh.....riiiight. Okay; are you saying you've got Chrome 95 running under Tahr64? Well; which GTK-3.0 did you use? Replacing that on its own didn't work for me......

Just curious, like. I have a Tahr64 605 multi-session DVD I keep just for experimental purposes; mainly to see if stuff will still work with an older Puppy. So feedback is all useful.

Mike.

Yeah, was.. too poetic. Even in my native language doesn't sound very well.
In answer to your question, yes (I used a pristine install to be sure).

Steps:
- official iso tahr64
- frugal install (save directory)
- update (fixes and glibc)
- install libgtk-3.0_3.10.8-i686-trusty.pet (source: your google drive /Linux Stuff/Browsers/GTK 3.0 libs packages/)
- make a symbolic link from /var/lib/dbus/machine-id to /etc (peculiar bug)
- and chrome 95 will launch gracefully

That's it, order seems important. I installed libgtk didn't work, updated tahr didn't work.
Then I saved and still didn't work. I uninstalled libgtk and installed it again and only then chrome burst forth.

@baraka :-

Curiouser & curiouser. I can't understand how you got that working, y'know.

Tahrpup64 and Chrome are both 64-bit. That GTK-3.0 .pet you've installed was 32-bit.....and unless you also installed the 32-bit_compat_libs SFS, Tahr64 wouldn't even see that.

Not heard of this /var/lib/dbus/machine-id to /etc link before. Out of curiosity, where did the info for that come from? That, alone, may be responsible.

I shall have to try this.

Mike.

All I did was that.
It seems important to update then install gtk libraries.
I didn't install compatibility, nor proprietary video driver.

LE: That sym missing was my idea. It was obvious from the terminal.
A retested now without it, still works.

I don't think it matters but I used in menu.lst the nouveau.modeset=0 kernel switch (my video card doesn't work with nouveau at all).

@baraka :-

Well, I'm gobsmacked. I really am.

Installing the 32-bit Trusty GTK-3.0 .pet, for some unfathomable reason, seems to make ALL the current clones work again in Tahr64. It makes absolutely no sense - and shouldn't, by rights, DO anything - but.....it does.

Mind you, YouTube and NetFlix - indeed, any streaming service - refuse to play anything, but I'm not really surprised. Can't have everything, eh? Even upgrading /usr/bin/ffmpeg to a newer version and linking avconv to it doesn't help with that one.....

Thanks for the tip!

Mike.

Youtube videos play nicely. Tested. Without compatibility, nothing, just those install steps mentioned before.
Perhaps (I'm no expert) these libraries are architecture independent.
Ah, I get it, a streaming service; could you give me an example? YouTube TV is only available in the US.
I tested successfully a local tv.

Thank you, sir, for your excellent job.

And not related, if someone is bothered by that update popup-button and doesn't want to update, append to run-as-spot command
from your chrome-pup file this:

--simulate-outdated-no-au='Tue, 31 Dec 2099 23:59:59 GMT'

This solution (from the myriad that exists) really works.

LE (I had some free time so...):

The culprit is libgdk-3.so.0.1000.8
Tahr came with tahr64fix2.zip that already contains gtk3 libraries, 64 bit stuff, as it should.
Now, if you overwrite libgdk-3.so.0.1000.8 with the one from libgtk-3.0_3.10.8-i686-trusty.pet, yeah, the 32 bit one, everything falls into place.
Something is screwed up for sure.

What happens is that the libgdk is "deleted" and probably is forcing chrome to fall on something reliable. (effectively deleting the library
achieves the same result - chrome working)
My guess was that the good one is: ../Google_Chrome-portable/chrome/lib/libgdk-3.so.0 Confirmed by testing it.

Best Solution (only for Tahr64, I tested pretty much everything, but... ):
- update tahr
- remove the following files from ../Google_Chrome-portable/chrome/lib/: libgdk-3.so.0 libgtk-3.so.0 and libpangoft2-1.0.so.0
For more elegant solution, I give up, the @#$%$# chrome is interconnected with everything.

Hello folks
Is this supposed to work on Xenialpup 64 bit?

Situation as follows:
New hard drive frugal install of Xenialpup7.5 64bit, downloaded from the Xenialpup thread here.
Pet get > update Xenial
Update Pale Moon to currant release.
Nothing else done with Xenial install

Downloaded Mike's Google Chrome portable and unpacked.
Left click on LAUNCH script - nothing appears to happen.
Realized that a right click on the script offers 'run in terminal' option so tried that in the hope something would be reported and got the following in the terminal window.

sh: /initrd/mnt/dev_save/Xenialpup75/Google_Chrome-portable/chrome/chrome: Permission denied
Script completed hit RETURN to close window.

Any ideas what is going on - Mike's stuff usually "just works"?
Thanks
Will

@Barkingmad

Hi,
I followed your steps and I can't reproduce the exact error, but definitely LAUNCH script is crashing. (although, my console spat a gdk error)
Try LAUNCH_NL (on my system, I encounter no problem with it).