I did a general update and got a message that "OPERA" has changed their URL.  Anyone have input about this?

Many Linux Lite users seem to think that Chrome and/or Chromium is a better browser choice than Firefox. Personally, concerning Linux Lite (Ubuntu based), I doubt there is a single real reason why Chrome or Chromium is better choice. In fact Firefox is now actually integrated into Ubuntu to manage resources much better than Chrome/Chromium and better aimed at the future concerning web extensions. I doubt there is a single technical real reason to use Chrome/Chromium in Ubuntu anymore, and in fact Firefox is technically superior in Linux. Don't answer this thread with opinions, anecdotal experiences, personal preferences, or suggestions for alternative browsers. This is not a request for your opinions. Answer with a technical real reason why Chrome/Chromium is a better choice. Good luck, because it definitely is NOT a better choice. The pseudo-tech Web is fueled by misinformation and poorly drawn preferences and opinion. LL is beautiful system, and Firefox is wonderfully integrated into it. On 64bit hardware with 4G of RAM or more there is no sensible technical reason to add alternative browsers to it.
TC 

I have a Dell PowerEdge 1800 server running Linux Lite 4.2 as the OS. It has three storage volumes that are RAID1 arrays, each consisting of two 1 TB drives.  The storage drives are on a Dell CERC 1.5 RAID controller.  It has a separate OS drive that is on the motherboard controller.  (I don't think that the issue is caused by the RAID card but I've been wrong before.)

When rebooting, sometimes one or more of the storage volumes doesn't mount. Going to Settings > Disks (manage drives and disks) shows the unmounted drive, its filesystem type and that's all.  I'll attache a screenshot the next time it happens.

Transferring a large quantity of music, .jpg, and .URL files from a Windows 10 desktop via a mapped drive to a Linux 4.2 server fails after a partial transfer and all folders on the target drive and the files on the root of the target volume are locked. There aren't any files visible in most of the locked folders on the target volume and folders inside of the locked folders are locked.  It appears that if a locked folder has files and folders in it, all files and folders at that level are locked and visible.  It appears that if the locked folders only contain folders, none of the downlevel folders or files are visible.  (I'm unable to definitely confirm this.)

Some terminal commands entered and the results are here:

The other drives' files (two storage volumes and the OS drive) aren't locked.  The three storage volumes are RAID1 arrays, each consisting of two 1 TB drives.  The storage drives are on a Dell CERC 1.5 RAID controller.  The OS drive is on the motherboard controller.  (I don't think that the issue is caused by the RAID card but I've been wrong before.)  The locked files are only unlocked after rebooting the server. 

In the latest instance, I was trying to transfer approx. 15.4 GB of files ranging is size from ~200 bytes to ~117 MB. The transfer halted after transferring 3.68 GB (3,957,816,743 bytes) with the error "You need permission to perform this action".  The <user> account on Windows 10 is a member of the Administrators group and has the same name as the <user> account on the server.  The password for the <user> account on Windows 10 is the same as the password for the root account on the server.  The source drive on the Windows 10 workstation is NTFS and the target driver on the server is ext4. SMB 3 has been disabled on the Windows 10 computer.

This has been a problem for months. I've previously had Ubuntu and Linux Mint on this box and the issue began happening either in Ubuntu or in Linux Mint.

If logs etc. are needed I'll provide them.  Thanks to all.

Hello Forum,

I've been a Linux Lite user since the 2.? series. It has always been installed alone on a small desk top computer. I have bought a new Lenovo M720 with 240G SSD and 500G hard drive. It has not arrived yet. It has windows 10 on it. Linux Lite would be my main OS with windows sometimes used.

I've spent literally 20 hours researching, reading and watching youtube videos on partitioning schemes and dual booting windows 10 and Linux. I'm still baffled and have a few questions to start.

1. Is LL 4.2 compatible with windows EUFI? Or do I need to monkey with legacy BIOS?

2. My old computer has an 80G hard drive which is full. I have more to put on that drive but can't. No more room. (movies and photos take a great deal of the space)  Since the new computer has both a 240 SSD and 500G HD I would value opinions on what partitioning schemes make the most sense with the hard drives I have available versus the large amount of data I will store versus having LL and windows as a dual boot.

3. I am not a computer whiz and don't want to get involved figuring out virtual machines etc. I simply would like my new computer to run LL4.2 mostly and when the need arises to use windows, I have that available. Ultimately, it would be wonderful if I was able to have one Home/Users folder where all my documents, videos, images were stored but available to both systems. Is this doable without smoking my new computer, frying my brain or hacking in the terminal?  Is this all relatively straight forward to boot a dual system?

Thanks so much for any input you folks might have. All the best. Ron

THe last 2 weeks i have experienced a freezing up of Linux Lite. It doesnt react at all and only option is to force a shutdown by holding the power button.
I have no idea what it is, never had this as long as i am using Linux Lite. Anhyone got an idea were to look? I tried menu/System/System Log but that wont show anyhting. Just a blank window that doesnt respond.

===========================
Install Updates Error log
===========================
Install Updates could not fetch the package cache information lists.
Go to https://www.linuxliteos.com/forums/ and paste the log below into a new or existing thread for assistance.

============ Log ===========

Ign:1 http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb stable InRelease
Hit:2 http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb stable Release
Hit:3 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu bionic InRelease
Hit:4 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu bionic-security InRelease
Hit:5 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu bionic-updates InRelease
Hit:6 http://archive.canonical.com/ubuntu bionic InRelease
Get:7 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu bionic-backports InRelease [74.6 kB]
Hit:8 http://ppa.launchpad.net/otto-kesselgulasch/gimp/ubuntu bionic InRelease
Ign:9 http://repo.vivaldi.com/stable/deb stable InRelease
Hit:10 http://ppa.launchpad.net/teejee2008/ppa/ubuntu bionic InRelease
Hit:11 http://repo.vivaldi.com/stable/deb stable Release
Hit:12 https://repo.skype.com/deb stable InRelease
Get:13 https://deb.opera.com/opera-stable stable InRelease [2,591 B]
Hit:15 http://repo.linuxliteos.com/linuxlite diamond InRelease
Reading package lists...
E: Repository 'https://deb.opera.com/opera-stable stable InRelease' changed its 'Origin' value from 'Opera Software ASA' to 'Opera Software AS'

Hi, I have a partition that displays on the desktop by default (see pic below). I'd like to not display it. How should I do that?

Extra info:

• The partition is unmounted by default (which is what I want). The icon still shows up as an unmounted partition though, which is what I'm trying to get rid of.
  
  
• In case this has any bearing on anything, the partition is an ext4 that I had saved from a previous install https://www.linuxliteos.com/forums/insta...(an-ext4)/ . It contains data and backups that I don't want to lose, so I do want to keep the partition and everything in it - I just don't want it displayed on desktop. Thanks.
  
  

I`m afraid to ask as I know nothing about computers.  I have a Toshiba satellite with Windows vista and I wanted to install
LL 3.8 32 bits.  It doesn`t boot from USB so I`d tried many times with DVD but instead of opening to LL on DVD, it appears something like
CD ROM device driver for IDE (four channels supported)
driver version V340
device name BANANA
TRANSFER MODE PROGRAMMED I/O
Drive 0  port  170 (sec.channel) master IRQ =15
firmware version 1.10
MSCDEX Version 2.23
copyright C microsoft Corp 1986-1993. All rights reserved.
Drive R driver banana unit 0

A:

So I don`t know what to do next....

So I'm trying to rehabilitate a Dell Inspiron 1545 whose HDD died by switching out the functioning HDD from a Dell Inspiron N5030 which I know was working.  The N5030 had a TV fall on the screen and so I felt best to use it's HDD in the 1545 rather than an external monitor with the N5030.

The Dell 1545 fired up fine and loaded the LL 3.8 that was on the N5030's HDD.  It kinda acted funny as the cut, copy, delete, paste menu kept popping up while I was navigating to the updates section.  Anyway I managed to get the updates and clicked on downloading them and after about 10 mins the battery ran out and I had not realized the charger was not plugged in properly (hence why it ran out of power).

When I plugged it into power the same "odd" menu would come up over what I was chasing, but I managed to get into updates again.  It fetched the updates and then when I clicked to download it came up with this message:

E:dpkg was interrupted you must run manually 'sudo dpkg--configure-a'  (this is what is looks like from the pic, however I can't be 100% sure of spacing...)

So I opened a terminal window and put this in (I didn't cut and paste it I typed it) and it says no command found.

My questions are;
1) since the HDD was running fine in the N5030 using an external monitor, is the "odd" acting because it's in a different computer?
2) Should I simply try doing a fresh install of LL 3.8 from my USB?
3) is it worth running the sudo command above if its shorter and if so what have I done wrong AND once I get the right command will it do it all itself?  I'm not really familiar with doing a lot of stuff in terminal.