Re: Screensavers in FC3
by Charles McColm
On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 12:00, fedora-desktop-list-request(a)redhat.com
wrote:
> First, there was the issue of 3D screensavers bogging down machines that
> couldn't handle them:
I leave my FC machine running at a computer recycling centre where I
help out and quite a few people have commented positively on them. I
know it's silly, but the screen savers were one of the things that have
helped us direct people away from Windows. It's not the only thing of
course, but I have done a couple of FC installs just because people were
impressed by the fact that they never saw the same screen saver twice.
Those things said, some of the 3D savers probably should go (as well as
some of the regular screen savers). FC does come with a lot of SS.
Cheers,
Chas
19 years, 9 months
Lock Screen in menu only works when screensaver is configured.
by Sindre Pedersen Bjordal
The other day I came across this weirdness. I pressed the lock screen
button in the menu and nothing happened. Nothing, it didn't lock, it
didn't display any message, nothing.
I got into #Fedora and asked around, I was answered quickly, I didn't
have my screen saver configured, that's why lock screen doesn't work.
I found this rather silly. Locking the screen isn't the same as a screen
saver. Screen savers pop up when you don't use your computer for a
while. Lock screen however, is used to prevent other users accessing the
computer while you're away. I don't use a screen I've disabled it in
the screen saver settings, but I do want to lock screen from time to
time.
Is there any way we could separate the lock screen and the screen saver,
so that when I press lock screen, it just works, regardless of my screen
saver settings? I don't care what the screen displays when my screen is
locked, I don't care at all. I just want it to lock.
If it's not possible to separate them, at least give me some kind of
message saying I should configure my screen saver, the last thing we
want to happen is nothing at all.
--
Sindre Pedersen Bjordal <foolish(a)fedoraforum.org>
www.fedoraforum.org
19 years, 9 months
RE: Screensavers in FC3
by Powell, James F CONT
Never get me wrong. I use the simplest 2d screensaver I can find. As long as something is on the screen and moves from time to time, it is sufficient. One of those awful Windows Screensavers where the logo just moves around on the screen would be sufficient for my purpose. I agree with the group as a whole that the screen savers really do need to be pared down, I just can't have them eliminated since I use Fedora as my desktop OS at work.
Jim Powell
L3 Communications GSI
Senior Scientist/Engineer
AV-8B Weapons Integration
james.f.powell(a)navy.mil <mailto:james.f.powell@navy.mil>
(760)939-9089
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fedora-desktop-list-bounces(a)redhat.com
> [mailto:fedora-desktop-list-bounces@redhat.com]On Behalf Of Behdad
> Esfahbod
> Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 9:21
> To: Discussions about development for the Fedora desktop
> Subject: RE: Screensavers in FC3
>
>
>
> In fact one of the basic reasons to move some screensavers out
> has been that the OpenGL ones (at least) can keep CPU usage on
> 100% on many machines, which contributes to the bill to pay and
> for many laptops it increases the temperature considerably.
>
> behdad
>
> On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Powell, James F CONT wrote:
>
> > I think I through a monkey wrench in the discussion when I
> > brought up that my jobsite requires a non-blank screen saver to
> > be running on all platforms that are powered up. Of course
> > because of this, we also can't take advantage of power
> > management since that would result in a blank screen as well.
> >
> > Jim Powell
> > L3 Communications GSI
> > Senior Scientist/Engineer
> > AV-8B Weapons Integration
> > james.f.powell(a)navy.mil <mailto:james.f.powell@navy.mil>
> > (760)939-9089
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: fedora-desktop-list-bounces(a)redhat.com
> > > [mailto:fedora-desktop-list-bounces@redhat.com]On Behalf Of Nils
> > > Philippsen
> > > Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 8:57
> > > To: Discussions about development for the Fedora desktop
> > > Subject: Re: Screensavers in FC3
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 14:20, Steven Garrity wrote:
> > > > There was some talk a few months back about trimming down the
> > > > screensavers in Fedora Core to a more sane number.
> > > >
> > > > First, there was the issue of 3D screensavers bogging down
> > > machines that
> > > > couldn't handle them:
> > > >
> > > https://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-desktop-list/2003-D
> > > ecember/msg00088.html
> > > >
> > > > Then, I floated a proposal to pare down the included
> screensavers:
> > > >
> > > https://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-desktop-list/2004-F
> > > ebruary/msg00002.html
> > > >
> > > > Then, Bill Nottingham had my favourite proposal yet for the
> > > > screensavers:
> > > >
> > > https://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-desktop-list/2004-F
> > ebruary/msg00006.html
> > >
> > > Bill Nottingham <notting redhat com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > xscreensaver - blank only, core
> > > > xscreensaver-extras - everything else
> > > >
> > > > Simple, clean, avoids flamewars.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Has there been any progress on this? Is it too late to do
> something for FC3?
> >
> > >From my POV this whole issue is 80% rather trivial
> (packaging) with 20%
> > coding that needs to be done before that can be the case:
> >
> > - xscreensaver needs to revert to "blank screen" if the
> user has chosen
> > anything other than {disable screen saver, blank screen}, likewise
> > xscreensaver-demo (which should rather be xscreensaver-config,
> > ...-prefs, ...) should only let you enable or disable
> blanking in that
> > case
> > - xscreensaver needs another means than X11 resources to let the
> > preferences tool know about the installed hacks, messing around with
> > /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/app-defaults/XScreenSaver is very cumbersome and
> > bug-prone. Something like a directory
> /etc/xscreensaver/hacks.d where
> > packages could just drop in small files describing their
> hacks would be
> > best IMO
> >
> > Both of these are not that trivial and would need to be accepted
> > upstream down the road -- we don't want to maintain such
> patches forever
> >
> > Nils
> >
>
> --behdad
> behdad.org
>
>
> --
> Fedora-desktop-list mailing list
> Fedora-desktop-list(a)redhat.com
> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-desktop-list
>
19 years, 9 months
RE: Screensavers in FC3
by Powell, James F CONT
I think I through a monkey wrench in the discussion when I brought up that my jobsite requires a non-blank screen saver to be running on all platforms that are powered up. Of course because of this, we also can't take advantage of power management since that would result in a blank screen as well.
Jim Powell
L3 Communications GSI
Senior Scientist/Engineer
AV-8B Weapons Integration
james.f.powell(a)navy.mil <mailto:james.f.powell@navy.mil>
(760)939-9089
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fedora-desktop-list-bounces(a)redhat.com
> [mailto:fedora-desktop-list-bounces@redhat.com]On Behalf Of Nils
> Philippsen
> Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 8:57
> To: Discussions about development for the Fedora desktop
> Subject: Re: Screensavers in FC3
>
>
> On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 14:20, Steven Garrity wrote:
> > There was some talk a few months back about trimming down the
> > screensavers in Fedora Core to a more sane number.
> >
> > First, there was the issue of 3D screensavers bogging down
> machines that
> > couldn't handle them:
> >
> https://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-desktop-list/2003-D
> ecember/msg00088.html
> >
> > Then, I floated a proposal to pare down the included screensavers:
> >
> https://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-desktop-list/2004-F
> ebruary/msg00002.html
> >
> > Then, Bill Nottingham had my favourite proposal yet for the
> > screensavers:
> >
> https://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-desktop-list/2004-F
ebruary/msg00006.html
>
> Bill Nottingham <notting redhat com> wrote:
> >
> > xscreensaver - blank only, core
> > xscreensaver-extras - everything else
> >
> > Simple, clean, avoids flamewars.
> >
>
> Has there been any progress on this? Is it too late to do something for FC3?
>From my POV this whole issue is 80% rather trivial (packaging) with 20%
coding that needs to be done before that can be the case:
- xscreensaver needs to revert to "blank screen" if the user has chosen
anything other than {disable screen saver, blank screen}, likewise
xscreensaver-demo (which should rather be xscreensaver-config,
...-prefs, ...) should only let you enable or disable blanking in that
case
- xscreensaver needs another means than X11 resources to let the
preferences tool know about the installed hacks, messing around with
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/app-defaults/XScreenSaver is very cumbersome and
bug-prone. Something like a directory /etc/xscreensaver/hacks.d where
packages could just drop in small files describing their hacks would be
best IMO
Both of these are not that trivial and would need to be accepted
upstream down the road -- we don't want to maintain such patches forever
Nils
--
Nils Philippsen / Red Hat / nphilipp(a)redhat.com
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- B. Franklin, 1759
PGP fingerprint: C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F 656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011
19 years, 9 months
RE: Screensavers in FC3
by Behdad Esfahbod
In fact one of the basic reasons to move some screensavers out
has been that the OpenGL ones (at least) can keep CPU usage on
100% on many machines, which contributes to the bill to pay and
for many laptops it increases the temperature considerably.
behdad
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Powell, James F CONT wrote:
> I think I through a monkey wrench in the discussion when I
> brought up that my jobsite requires a non-blank screen saver to
> be running on all platforms that are powered up. Of course
> because of this, we also can't take advantage of power
> management since that would result in a blank screen as well.
>
> Jim Powell
> L3 Communications GSI
> Senior Scientist/Engineer
> AV-8B Weapons Integration
> james.f.powell(a)navy.mil <mailto:james.f.powell@navy.mil>
> (760)939-9089
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: fedora-desktop-list-bounces(a)redhat.com
> > [mailto:fedora-desktop-list-bounces@redhat.com]On Behalf Of Nils
> > Philippsen
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 8:57
> > To: Discussions about development for the Fedora desktop
> > Subject: Re: Screensavers in FC3
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 14:20, Steven Garrity wrote:
> > > There was some talk a few months back about trimming down the
> > > screensavers in Fedora Core to a more sane number.
> > >
> > > First, there was the issue of 3D screensavers bogging down
> > machines that
> > > couldn't handle them:
> > >
> > https://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-desktop-list/2003-D
> > ecember/msg00088.html
> > >
> > > Then, I floated a proposal to pare down the included screensavers:
> > >
> > https://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-desktop-list/2004-F
> > ebruary/msg00002.html
> > >
> > > Then, Bill Nottingham had my favourite proposal yet for the
> > > screensavers:
> > >
> > https://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-desktop-list/2004-F
> ebruary/msg00006.html
> >
> > Bill Nottingham <notting redhat com> wrote:
> > >
> > > xscreensaver - blank only, core
> > > xscreensaver-extras - everything else
> > >
> > > Simple, clean, avoids flamewars.
> > >
> >
> > Has there been any progress on this? Is it too late to do something for FC3?
>
> >From my POV this whole issue is 80% rather trivial (packaging) with 20%
> coding that needs to be done before that can be the case:
>
> - xscreensaver needs to revert to "blank screen" if the user has chosen
> anything other than {disable screen saver, blank screen}, likewise
> xscreensaver-demo (which should rather be xscreensaver-config,
> ...-prefs, ...) should only let you enable or disable blanking in that
> case
> - xscreensaver needs another means than X11 resources to let the
> preferences tool know about the installed hacks, messing around with
> /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/app-defaults/XScreenSaver is very cumbersome and
> bug-prone. Something like a directory /etc/xscreensaver/hacks.d where
> packages could just drop in small files describing their hacks would be
> best IMO
>
> Both of these are not that trivial and would need to be accepted
> upstream down the road -- we don't want to maintain such patches forever
>
> Nils
>
--behdad
behdad.org
19 years, 9 months
RE: Screensavers in FC3
by Powell, James F CONT
For the most part you have it. It is to insure that anyone walking into the room can see that the machines are on and locked. The other reason for this is security. If an unsecured person were to walk into the room, it is obvious what machines are powered up, this give the escort a bit of a heads up when coming into the room.
Jim Powell
L3 Communications GSI
Senior Scientist/Engineer
AV-8B Weapons Integration
james.f.powell(a)navy.mil <mailto:james.f.powell@navy.mil>
(760)939-9089
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fedora-desktop-list-bounces(a)redhat.com
> [mailto:fedora-desktop-list-bounces@redhat.com]On Behalf Of Will Cohen
> Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 8:31
> To: Discussions about development for the Fedora desktop
> Subject: Re: Screensavers in FC3
>
>
> Powell, James F CONT wrote:
> > You know the only problem with that would be places like
> where I work where if your computer is on, it is required to
> have a screen saver, and that screen saver IS required to
> make it obvious that the computer is on. Personally I don't
> want to have to go out and find screen savers when there are
> so many that are currently in the Fedora Core that handle
> this requirement. Now I do also agree that a lot of the
> clutter could be removed, but there does need to be some
> non-blank screen savers left in.
>
> What is the logic behind this policy? Is this to make sure
> that someone
> doesn't leave a computer unsecured? If so, does the computer need to
> show that the screen is locked or the person is logged out? Are KVM
> forbidden?
>
> -Will
>
> >
> > Jim Powell
> > L3 Communications GSI
> > Senior Scientist/Engineer
> > AV-8B Weapons Integration
> > james.f.powell(a)navy.mil <mailto:james.f.powell@navy.mil>
> > (760)939-9089
> >
> >
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: fedora-desktop-list-bounces(a)redhat.com
> >>[mailto:fedora-desktop-list-bounces@redhat.com]On Behalf Of Steven
> >>Garrity
> >>Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 7:53
> >>To: Discussions about development for the Fedora desktop
> >>Subject: Re: Screensavers in FC3
> >>
> >>
> >>Ed Mack wrote:
> >>
> >>>>>>Simple, clean, avoids flamewars.
> >>>>>>
> >>>
> >>>That's a nice way to handle it, but it's only really aimed
> >>
> >>at the geek
> >>
> >>>population. 'Bootstrapping GCC' isn't something many normal
> >>
> >>users do.
> >>
> >>>I like the idea of including a few 'pretty' screensavers
> >>
> >>the user can
> >>
> >>>choose to run from the control panel if they feel the urge
> >>
> >>to customise
> >>
> >>>- otherwise people can become disalusioned, and people will happily
> >>>judge their first Linux experience by the quality of given
> >>
> >>screensavers.
> >>
> >>>A lot of the Xscreensavers need to be taken to the pasture
> and shot,
> >>>they are /so/ 1983
> >>
> >>
> >>I agree that a few simple/quality screensavers would be fine
> >>to include
> >>by default, but if the debate over which should stay will at
> >>all delay
> >>the removal of all the cruft, I'd say we go to blank-only.
> >>
> >>I think blank-only is a better default for now, and we can work on
> >>getting a couple (probably just one good simple Fedora logo
> >>screensaver)
> >>back in later on.
> >>
> >>Steven Garrity
> >>
> >>
> >>--
> >>Fedora-desktop-list mailing list
> >>Fedora-desktop-list(a)redhat.com
> >>http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-desktop-list
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Fedora-desktop-list mailing list
> Fedora-desktop-list(a)redhat.com
> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-desktop-list
>
19 years, 9 months
RE: Screensavers in FC3
by Powell, James F CONT
You know the only problem with that would be places like where I work where if your computer is on, it is required to have a screen saver, and that screen saver IS required to make it obvious that the computer is on. Personally I don't want to have to go out and find screen savers when there are so many that are currently in the Fedora Core that handle this requirement. Now I do also agree that a lot of the clutter could be removed, but there does need to be some non-blank screen savers left in.
Jim Powell
L3 Communications GSI
Senior Scientist/Engineer
AV-8B Weapons Integration
james.f.powell(a)navy.mil <mailto:james.f.powell@navy.mil>
(760)939-9089
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fedora-desktop-list-bounces(a)redhat.com
> [mailto:fedora-desktop-list-bounces@redhat.com]On Behalf Of Steven
> Garrity
> Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 7:53
> To: Discussions about development for the Fedora desktop
> Subject: Re: Screensavers in FC3
>
>
> Ed Mack wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > Simple, clean, avoids flamewars.
> >>> >
> >
> > That's a nice way to handle it, but it's only really aimed
> at the geek
> > population. 'Bootstrapping GCC' isn't something many normal
> users do.
> >
> > I like the idea of including a few 'pretty' screensavers
> the user can
> > choose to run from the control panel if they feel the urge
> to customise
> > - otherwise people can become disalusioned, and people will happily
> > judge their first Linux experience by the quality of given
> screensavers.
> > A lot of the Xscreensavers need to be taken to the pasture and shot,
> > they are /so/ 1983
>
>
> I agree that a few simple/quality screensavers would be fine
> to include
> by default, but if the debate over which should stay will at
> all delay
> the removal of all the cruft, I'd say we go to blank-only.
>
> I think blank-only is a better default for now, and we can work on
> getting a couple (probably just one good simple Fedora logo
> screensaver)
> back in later on.
>
> Steven Garrity
>
>
> --
> Fedora-desktop-list mailing list
> Fedora-desktop-list(a)redhat.com
> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-desktop-list
>
19 years, 9 months
fortran compiler for quadruple computation
by Muhammad Soofi
Dear Fedora users:
I have a AMD64 FX51 processor based computer and
want to use it for quadruple precision computation in
Fortran language. The idea is to use the capabilities
of the 64 bit processing of AMD64 (not quadruple
support with 32 bit processor).
Does anyone know of a free Fortran compiler with
quadruple precision support for AMD64 under linux
(Fedora)? Thank you.
Regards,
Muhammad A. Soofi
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
19 years, 9 months
new window manager
by Sameer Kamat
Hi ,
I have a window manager that I would like to add as a drop down
option during logon. On Fedora Core 1 with gdm-2.4.4.5 I just added
a wm.desktop file in /etc/X11/dm/Sessions/ and it worked. But the same
operation does not seem to work on FC2 ( gdm-2.6.0.0-3) Is there some
package I am missing since the /etc/X11/dm directory was not present
in my default FC2 installation.
Please advise.
Thanks,
Sameer.
19 years, 9 months
