Damn, but I'm not sure if I agree with gregp's resolution of the bug. The way I understand the changes in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1964046, it should still use the system theme, but rendered by firefox itself. However, the current state is that it doesn't follow the system theme anymore :/
EDIT: I just saw this comment: https://lemmy.world/comment/17957836
And yep, that's correct. I'm also using the Papirus icon theme, when I change the theme to breeze or something else, the buttons in firefox titlebar also reflect this change after a restart. So Firefox is now using the window-{maximize,minimize,close,....}-symbolic icons from the icon theme and not from the window decorations setting.
I have the same issue since one or two months, I'm on Firefox Nightly 142.0a1 currently.
For me it looks like this:
Firefox on the left, Dolphin (which uses the system titlebar control buttons) on the right.
A few months ago, firefox also used the system titlebar control buttons. When I noticed the change at first, I also searched for solution online and in about:config, but didn't find anything. All other solutions posted here sadly don't work:
browser.tabs.inTitlebar only adds a standalone titlebar, like you noted.
When searching for non-native in about:config, I don't see any titlebar buttons option that I can turn off.
Vertical Tabs are already disabled for me in the settings.
If anyone finds a solution to this, I would be happy to be notified. Thanks in advance!
They're asking about the password prompt for the disk encryption, which is shown before the rootfs can be accessed. Thus, installing a display manager to the rootfs will not help. Furthermore, a display manager serves the purpose of logging in users, not unlocking an encrypted partition.
Thanks for your reply! Linus didn't only call out people posting flame replies, but also folks interested in a serious discussion on that topic, who also contributed to the kernel before (see PeterCxy's blog: https://typeblog.net/55833/getting-called-paid-actor-by-linus-torvalds). Most people simply wanted to know specifically which compliance requirement lead to the removal of russian maintainers. Linus never responded to these questions and called out people asking for that as russian trolls. AFAIK we still don’t know the exact reasons for the removal, which is just intransparent.
IMO By not answering these reasonable questions and calling people out as russian trolls, Linus did exactly what russian trolls want: cause disarray in the kernel community.
Get your head examined. And get the fuck out of here with this shit.
Yes, language like this is clearly unacceptable in a productive discussion.
Offtopic, but this reminded me that the Linux kernel has a CoC. Aren't the recent comments by Linus on the removal of russian maintainers, where he called several kernel developers paid actors, a CoC violation as well? Or have these comments w.r.t. to the CoC already been discussed?
What about the certificate installation on windows? Besides, I never claimed it’s malware, but it’s certainly software I wouldn’t trust.
When running older Rustdesk versions on wayland it would display a notification saying "Rustdesk doesn’t support Wayland yet", containing a button labeled "Fix it", which is the button you’re referring to. There’s no way for the user to know that clicking this button will edit their GDM config and disable Wayland.
Furthermore, the code quality is really bad. 90% of the linux platform-dependant code is just executing shell commands and parsing their output, while the same could be achieved in a safe way with proper rust builtins: https://github.com/rustdesk/rustdesk/blob/master/src/platform/linux.rs
While I agree that Rustdesk works pretty flawlessly, the codebase and the behavior of the developers made me distrust the software and I don’t recommend using it.
I also host my own mailserver and I agree that it mostly works fine. However, there are some email providers that cause trouble:
Google seems to randomly sort some of my mails into the recipients spam folder, while others are delivered fine to the respective inbox. It kinda sucks that you can never be sure whether the recipient actually received your mail or whether they just don't reply. My IP and domain are not blacklisted on any spam list; SPF, DKIM and DMARC are set up correctly as well.
Even worse is the Telekom (German ISP), who use an explicit whitelist of IP addresses (only IPv4 of course) and require you to display your contact information publicly on a website reachable via the same domain your mailserver uses. Once you've set this up you need to message them to be put on their whitelist. If you're not on their whitelist, they simply reject your mails, they are not even delivered to the spam folder (maybe it's not worse than Google, because you at least get a notice from your mailserver that your mail couldn't be delivered). In the end I decided that I don't care enough to comply with their regulations and just don't send any mails to Telekom customers.
Aside Google and Telekom, I've really never had any issues though.
This works, but it's the same as disabling
browser.tabs.inTitlebar. The result is a separate titlebar above the tab bar.