Hello all,

I've used a Noobs installation in which chromium comes with an adblocker pre-installed in the default profile. The thing is that I've just created a second profile ("profile 1"), and see that it doesn't have the adblocker.

How do I activate the already existing adblocker from the default profile
into this, the second one ?

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

On Sat, 18 Sep 2021 17:57:26 +0200, "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> declaimed the following:

I've used a Noobs installation in which chromium comes with an adblocker

How old is that installation? The R-Pi foundation discontinued the NOOBS package some time back -- it was replaced by the "Raspberry Pi
Imager"

Imager runs on desktop computers and is used to select from the available OS images, and writes just that image to the SD card. This is different from NOOBS, which ran /on/ the R-Pi and installed OS images
somewhat "live". Most of the more obscure images have to be obtained separately, and Imager will then write them to the card.

pre-installed in the default profile. The thing is that I've just created a >second profile ("profile 1"), and see that it doesn't have the adblocker.

Things like ad blockers are commonly third party plug-ins and are installed on a per-user (or perhaps profile if using multiple profiles with
one user login) basis.

How do I activate the already existing adblocker from the default profile >into this, the second one ?

If it doesn't show up under Settings/Extensions you will probably have to use the "search" bar to locate the particular blocker in use. Using VNC
to my small web-server R-Pi [I don't have a desktop running on the regular experiment R-Pi, just SSH] I see that its Chromium browser appears to have "uBlock Origins" installed. Note that searching for extensions likely means
you will need a full Internet access from the R-Pi.

I don't think you're just going to be able to copy it from one profile to another -- they seem to be saved in randomly generated directory names (which are probably linked via some database to the extension)... cf:

md_admin@microdiversity:~/.config/chromium/Default/Extensions$ ls -l
total 12
drwx------ 3 md_admin md_admin 4096 Oct 14 2020 aleakchihdccplidncghkekgioiakgal
drwx------ 4 md_admin md_admin 4096 Sep 18 12:38 cjpalhdlnbpafiamejdnhcphjbkeiagm
drwx------ 3 md_admin md_admin 4096 Sep 18 12:38 pkedcjkdefgpdelpbcmbmeomcjbeemfm

I believe Default is the profile name.



--
Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber AF6VN
wlfraed@ix.netcom.com http://wlfraed.microdiversity.freeddns.org/

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

Dennis,

I don't think you're just going to be able to copy it from one profile
to another -- they seem to be saved in randomly generated directory names (which are probably linked via some database to the extension)... cf:

Well ... what would happen when that database is also copied to the new
profile ?

I could just copy the "Default" profile folder to "Profile 1", throw the "cookies.txt" file out and see if that will work. But if someone has already done something like that I would be a fool not to try to make use of what
they have already found out. Hence me asking. :-)

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

Dennis,

But since one normally uses profiles to separate browsing interests,
and with 16 SQLite3 databases in a profile,

That is why I asked if anyone had any kind of knowledge about it. :-)

unless you are prepared to install an SQLite3 command line
or GUI tool, and peruse the table contents of each of the 16
to sanitize them

??? I suggested to just copy, next to the folder containing the extensions, the database containing the information to those extensions. All other databases would be the fresh ones created for the new profile.

it is probably better to just install a fresh ad blocker using the
profile itself.

Not as far as I'm concerned, as I would than have two profiles with
different adblockers. :-(

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

On Sat, 18 Sep 2021 19:39:34 +0200, "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> declaimed the following:

Well ... what would happen when that database is also copied to the new >profile ?

The database I hypothesized would be at a higher level. It would maybe have things like

profile-name extension-name extension-directory-name
extension2-name ...
profile2-name ... ...

There are SQLite databases stuffed throughout... (16 in "Default" alone).

OTOH, the only higher level one appears to be something for cookies. Chromium may use the profile name directly.

But since one normally uses profiles to separate browsing interests, and with 16 SQLite3 databases in a profile, unless you are prepared to
install an SQLite3 command line or GUI tool, and peruse the table contents
of each of the 16 to sanitize them (and that may require figuring out how
stuff is linked between tables), it is probably better to just install a
fresh ad blocker using the profile itself.


--
Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber AF6VN
wlfraed@ix.netcom.com http://wlfraed.microdiversity.freeddns.org/

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

Dana Sat, 18 Sep 2021 21:16:15 +0200, R.Wieser <address@not.available> napis'o:

Dennis,

But since one normally uses profiles to separate browsing interests,
and with 16 SQLite3 databases in a profile,

That is why I asked if anyone had any kind of knowledge about it. :-)

unless you are prepared to install an SQLite3 command line
or GUI tool, and peruse the table contents of each of the 16
to sanitize them

??? I suggested to just copy, next to the folder containing the extensions, the database containing the information to those extensions. All other databases would be the fresh ones created for the new profile.

it is probably better to just install a fresh ad blocker using the
profile itself.

Not as far as I'm concerned, as I would than have two profiles with
different adblockers. :-(

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

Do not copy foler... mak a simbolic link to parts you need.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

Nikolaj,

Do not copy foler... mak a simbolic link to parts you need.

:-) Just this morning I remembered that Linux has got symbolic links, and
that I could do something with that.

A question though: How do I (tell PCManFM to), when copying a folder,
symbolic link all files in them ?

Mind you, the next step is to delete some files in there (cookies.txt, bookmarks.txt, others? ) so that the involved profiles can be(come)
different - meaning I can't just symbolic link the folder(s).

Regards,
Rudy Wieser
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

Dana Sun, 19 Sep 2021 10:05:31 +0100, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> napis'o:

On 19/09/2021 09:18, R.Wieser wrote:

Nikolaj,

Do not copy foler... mak a simbolic link to parts you need.

Thus ensuring that any changes to one profile will be instantly
unavoidable in the other.

Only if you link the whole folder.
He can link only parts he needs.
Other files/folders can be standard and unique to this folder.

:-) Just this morning I remembered that Linux has got symbolic links, and >> that I could do something with that.

I wouldn't. See above.

start some terminal...
go to your new_foler with cd somethin...

ln -s ../old_folder/* .

and go from here...
remove files you need fresh... or remove these and than make a copy
from your previous folder.
This can be done using mc (midnight commander).

A question though: How do I (tell PCManFM to), when copying a folder,
symbolic link all files in them ?

You cant.
Not using a simple command.

Use command line. Fastest and easiest way.

Mind you, the next step is to delete some files in there (cookies.txt,
bookmarks.txt, others? ) so that the involved profiles can be(come)
different - meaning I can't just symbolic link the folder(s).

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

On 19/09/2021 09:18, R.Wieser wrote:

Nikolaj,

Do not copy foler... mak a simbolic link to parts you need.

Thus ensuring that any changes to one profile will be instantly
unavoidable in the other.

:-) Just this morning I remembered that Linux has got symbolic links, and that I could do something with that.

I wouldn't. See above.

A question though: How do I (tell PCManFM to), when copying a folder, symbolic link all files in them ?

You cant.
Not using a simple command.

Mind you, the next step is to delete some files in there (cookies.txt, bookmarks.txt, others? ) so that the involved profiles can be(come)
different - meaning I can't just symbolic link the folder(s).

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

--
"I guess a rattlesnake ain't risponsible fer bein' a rattlesnake, but ah
puts mah heel on um jess the same if'n I catches him around mah chillun".
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

Nikolaj,

A question though: How do I (tell PCManFM to), when copying
a folder, symbolic link all files in them ?

...

start some terminal...
go to your new_foler with cd somethin...

ln -s ../old_folder/* .

Thanks. That looks simple enough. :-)

remove files you need fresh... or remove these and than make a
copy from your previous folder.
This can be done using mc (midnight commander).

Any particular reason to use MC and not the build-in PCManFM ?


By the way: I already tried to copy-paste the "Default" folder to "Profile
1" using PCManFM (after first having renamed the origional "Profile 1"
folder ofcourse), and it seems to work as intended (YouTube thinks I'm a new user and wants me to provide new privacy settings).

Regards,
Rudy Wieser
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

On Sun, 19 Sep 2021 09:18:39 -0000 (UTC), Nikolaj Lazic <nlazicBEZ_OVOGA@mudrac.ffzg.hr> declaimed the following:

Only if you link the whole folder.
He can link only parts he needs.
Other files/folders can be standard and unique to this folder.

To me, that is the question. The OP is talking about /just/ the cookies... But there are SQLite databases for saved logins, and other items (history of visited sites, etc.).

And just deleting those may not be sufficient -- if they are created as part of "installing" a plug-in/extension, the lack when attempting to run
may cause the plug-in to fail.


--
Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber AF6VN
wlfraed@ix.netcom.com http://wlfraed.microdiversity.freeddns.org/ --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

Dana Sun, 19 Sep 2021 14:14:32 +0200, R.Wieser <address@not.available> napis'o:

Nikolaj,

A question though: How do I (tell PCManFM to), when copying
a folder, symbolic link all files in them ?

...

start some terminal...
go to your new_foler with cd somethin...

ln -s ../old_folder/* .

Thanks. That looks simple enough. :-)

remove files you need fresh... or remove these and than make a
copy from your previous folder.
This can be done using mc (midnight commander).

Any particular reason to use MC and not the build-in PCManFM ?

No. :)
It works in terminal. :)
And you can type in command as in command line (shell).
That way you can see what is happeining in your foler and type in
command or use the ones in the menues.

And looks like Norton Commander. :)
Yeah... I'm old enough to remember Norton commander. :)

By the way: I already tried to copy-paste the "Default" folder to "Profile
1" using PCManFM (after first having renamed the origional "Profile 1"
folder ofcourse), and it seems to work as intended (YouTube thinks I'm a new user and wants me to provide new privacy settings).

Maybe some setting also records the folder name.
Try grepping...
Go inti the folder
and in sht shell:
grep "Profile 1" *

you will get all the files containing "Profile 1"
You can also use mc (midnigh commander)... Find file...
and enter the text you are looking for.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

Dana Sun, 19 Sep 2021 09:04:57 -0400, Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> napis'o:

On Sun, 19 Sep 2021 09:18:39 -0000 (UTC), Nikolaj Lazic
<nlazicBEZ_OVOGA@mudrac.ffzg.hr> declaimed the following:

Only if you link the whole folder.
He can link only parts he needs.
Other files/folders can be standard and unique to this folder.

To me, that is the question. The OP is talking about /just/ the cookies... But there are SQLite databases for saved logins, and other items (history of visited sites, etc.).

And just deleting those may not be sufficient -- if they are created as part of "installing" a plug-in/extension, the lack when attempting to run
may cause the plug-in to fail.

He would have to see what he needs. I guess some files could have some kind
of setting with the "original" path in it. These should be also changed. Yeah... alot of work... but pulgins could work as intended.
They have their own folder.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

Nikolaj,

Any particular reason to use MC and not the build-in PCManFM ?

No. :)

Ok, thanks. Just wondered if it would do something special.

Yeah... I'm old enough to remember Norton commander. :)

I still have-and-use Norton Editor (DOS version) on my Windows 'puters. :-)

(YouTube thinks I'm a new user and wants me to provide
new privacy settings).

Maybe some setting also records the folder name.

Nope, thats not it. YouTube saves some kind of a User-ID in a cookie. And that "YouTube thinks I'm a new user" is exactly what I wanted to happen -
two seperate YouTube profiles. :-)

Regards,
Rudy Wieser
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

Dennis,

To me, that is the question. The OP is talking about /just/
the cookies...

Thats correct. And I mentioned just those for a reason.

But there are SQLite databases for saved logins, and other
items (history of visited sites, etc.).

Could you imagine a situation in which having just one set of data for each
of the ones you mentioned could be a good thing ? I can. :-)

And yes, I did let the above pass my mind when I got the suggestion to just symlink most all of the involved files.

Better yet, I could /choose/ which ones I would keep shared and which ones I would want to have seperate. But yes, I would than need to figure out which configuration files/databases would be inter-dependant and only
share/seperate them in such inter-depandant groups.

And just deleting those may not be sufficient -- if they are created
as part of "installing" a plug-in/extension, the lack when attempting
to run may cause the plug-in to fail.

:-) Which why I posted my question : what would I need to do to get it to
work.

I expected that (many?) other people would have run into the same problem
and have figured something out. Maybe those will still reply in the days to come ...


By the way :

I've started with trying if a full copy duplicate of a profile folder would work, as that would be the simpelest thing to do/check. Currently it looks
to be working.

I also considered to just have/use multiple cookie files in the "Default" profile, and just "switch over" by, just before starting the browser,
deleting the old "cookie.txt" symlink and than symlinking that name to one
of a series of other cookie files. IOW, some pseudo profile switching.

That I did not start with that is because I consider it to be a hack and a
full profile copy is even simpler. :-)

Regards,
Rudy Wieser
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

On Sun, 19 Sep 2021 20:37:26 +0200, "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> declaimed the following:

I expected that (many?) other people would have run into the same problem
and have figured something out. Maybe those will still reply in the days to >come ...

My suspicion is that most of those wanting separate profiles want COMPLETE isolation, and would install plug-ins as desired per profile -- letting the profile populate its database as the user accesses web sites.


--
Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber AF6VN
wlfraed@ix.netcom.com http://wlfraed.microdiversity.freeddns.org/ --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

On Sun, 19 Sep 2021 20:37:26 +0200, R.Wieser wrote:

I expected that (many?) other people would have run into the same
problem and have figured something out. Maybe those will still reply in
the days to come ...

Many, including myself, have had the same problem. My approach is, and
has always been, to install the browsers I use on each system I need them
on. Then I start the web browser(s) in each user on each computer I need
to run them from and use their settings and preferences menus to
configure them the same as on other computers and add/enable the
extensions and plugins I use for other systems and logins. This is fast
enough (my memory is good enough, and this is necessary seldom enough)
that I've never found it necessary to automate the process.

FWIW, I know nothing about Chrome: I don't and won't use it (the only
Google software I knowingly use is Google Earth - which they bought
rather than wrote.

My main browser these days is Brave, which has a lot of the add-blockers
etc. already built in. Apart from this, I have Firefox and Lynx installed
on all systems except RPis, which only have Lynx.

Since the process of installing a new browser is so seldom done I see no
need to spend time automating the process, but of course YMMV and I. for
one would be fascinated to know why you find browser installation worthy
of spending time to automate the process.


--
--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

Martin,

Many, including myself, have had the same problem.

Nope, your problem is different. :-)

My approach is, and has always been, to install the browsers
I use on each system I need them on. Then I start the web
browser(s) in each user on each computer

In my case its about creating a second browser profile *for the same user*.

Also, my starting point is a Noobs installation, with the browser and
adblocker being part of that installation. IOW, I do not have install files for either the browser or the adblocker.

FWIW, I know nothing about Chrome: I don't and won't use it

I wish I had that choice. I tried to replace it with FireFox, but for some reason it was not even able to run a 720p YouTube movie on any acceptable
speed (/lots/ of stutter). :-\

but of course YMMV and I. for one would be fascinated to know
why you find browser installation worthy of spending time to
automate the process.

It has got zero to do with automation.

The only thing I wanted to accomplish is to keep YouTubes "looking at what
you viewed previously you might find this interresting" suggestions list
clean. I might have viewed a rather limited group of clips for ages, but
one or two views of anything else causes the suggestions to go fully outof whack. Not funny.

So, I decided I need two profiles : one to view that rather limited group of clips on, and another to rummage thru what YouTube otherwise has to offer.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

Dennis,

My suspicion is that most of those wanting separate profiles
want COMPLETE isolation,

:-) That is what my initial question aimed for : a new profile with a *copy*
of the adblock plugin. Complete isolation.

Only later on I realized that there where other possibilities to explore,
which I than mentioned. As thats the kind of person I am I'm afraid. I
like to have multiple possibilities, after which I than choose which one I think I can use best.

By the way : This morning, as a quick check to see if a profile has got absolute paths stored (to its own, profile related files) I renamed the "Default" profile to something else and started the "Profile 1" one - which contains a copy of the "Default" profile/folder

If such fixed paths would be there (supposedly still pointing to the
"Default" profile) the browser would either error-out, or would recreate the invoved files (into an also recreated "Default" folder).

Neither happened.

Ofcourse this check was not at al exhaustive, but it does seem to be an indication that profile paths are relative to that profile.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

On Mon, 20 Sep 2021 10:01:02 +0200, "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> declaimed the following:

I wish I had that choice. I tried to replace it with FireFox, but for some >reason it was not even able to run a 720p YouTube movie on any acceptable >speed (/lots/ of stutter). :-\

And that may be attributable to the R-Pi foundation having pre-configured Chromium with a YouTube specific extension

chrome://extensions/

"""
h264ify

Makes YouTube stream H.264 videos instead of VP8/VP9 videos
"""
sitting right next to ad blocker extension

"""
uBlock Origin

Finally, an efficient blocker. Easy on CPU and memory.
"""


--
Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber AF6VN
wlfraed@ix.netcom.com http://wlfraed.microdiversity.freeddns.org/ --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

On 20-09-2021 17:26, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:

On Mon, 20 Sep 2021 10:01:02 +0200, "R.Wieser" wrote:

I wish I had that choice. I tried to replace it with FireFox, but for some >> reason it was not even able to run a 720p YouTube movie on any acceptable
speed (/lots/ of stutter). :-\

And that may be attributable to the R-Pi foundation having pre-configured Chromium with a YouTube specific extension

chrome://extensions/

"""
h264ify

Makes YouTube stream H.264 videos instead of VP8/VP9 videos
"""

That is just so that the hardware acceleration they built in to their
version of Chromium can do its job. The RPi GPU doesn't work with vp8/9.

And that version of Chromium is the only browser they specially prepare.
So yeah, no hardware acceleration in Firefox (not even when you add the corresponding h264ify extension).
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

On Tue, 21 Sep 2021 09:11:04 +0200, A. Dumas wrote:

And that version of Chromium is the only browser they specially prepare.
So yeah, no hardware acceleration in Firefox (not even when you add the corresponding h264ify extension).

Has anybody tried the Flow browser on an RPi yet? It's supposed to
support GPUs and has an RPi port. https://www.ekioh.com/flow-browser/

These days I'm running Brave on my Fedora boxes. Works well and has
virtually all the adblockers and security extensions you might want
already built in, but so far it seems to have no RPi port.


--
--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)