desktop April 2013

desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org

19 participants
9 discussions

Alt+Tab on screen display not disappearing
by Ryan Lerch 30 May '13

30 May '13

Just wondering if anyone else has experienced in F18 (GNOME3.6) a weird bug where the alt+tab switcher does not disappear? When it happens, i can press press alt+tab again and other switcher is displayed under (z-index wise) the one already on the screen. If i keep pressing alt+tab, these layer up also. The annoying part is that when you go to restart the shell, (with alt+f2), that overlay does not get keyboard focus, so you can't restart it from there. The only way to restart the shell is to switch to another tty, and kill the gnome-shell process with kill -9 anyone else experiencing this issue? cheers, ryanlerch

5 10

Samba network printers unusable with default Fedora Desktop installs
by Elad Alfassa 13 May '13

13 May '13

I recently discovered that if I have a printer attached to a Windows machine (and shared via samba), it'll unusable on default install, because samba-client isn't installed by default. control-center's printers panel managed to discover the printer, but after the driver prompt dialog it gave a cryptic error message and did not install the printer. After installing samba-client, adding a samba network printer worked as expected. Therefor I suggest we add samba-client to our default installation, it's only 1.2MB. Ideally I think it should be added as a Requires in control-center's spec file, but we could add it to comps instead. If you think adding this to the default install is a bad idea, control-center should install it with packagekit whenever users tries to add a Samba printer. On a related (printing) note, I think it would also make sense to have hpijs as a default as well, to support more printers. -- -Elad Alfassa.

7 25

file-roller changes
by Rahul Sundaram 24 Apr '13

24 Apr '13

Hi Unar got approved recently https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=953384 It is a multi-format extractor but the key part is that it has support for RARv3 format and is a replacement for the non-free unrar (in RPM Fusion). unar and lsar are just command line tools but file-roller does support it since 3.6. Once unar gets built, I intend to push the packages changes in file-roller (BR on json-glib-devel and requires on unar) for Rawhide and Fedora 19. I have already tested it with a variety of RAR files and it works fine. If anyone has any objections, let me know. Thanks Rahul

2 2

Update notification triggers online update tool
by Adam Williamson 17 Apr '13

17 Apr '13

So I reported this bug back in October 2012, but it has had zero attention paid: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=863592 it seems like kind of a significant bug, and it got into the release of F18, and it's still in F19. Is anyone ever going to get around to dealing with it? The problem is that the "Important updates are available" notification launches the *online* update tool. If our story is that offline updates are the Way To Go for 'normal' users - which is certainly what https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/OfflineSystemUpdates seems to be saying - then that's inconsistent. It seems like once the 'Install updates and restart' bit was done people just kinda figured the feature was done, without considering how interaction with gnome-pk should be handled. Note the item "Update gnome-packagekit to support offline updates" under 'Scope' is not marked as 'done', but the feature is listed as 100% complete. There's an implication on the feature page that there should be a distinction drawn between updates of 'OS components' (which should be offline) and 'application updates and installations' (which should still be possible online), but there's no indication this has actually been implemented, and in my testing, the update notification pops up and calls gnome-packagekit even when the update package set contains the kernel, or systemd, or anything like that. It just seems like the intersection between gnome-pk and offline updates isn't really done yet, and needs to get finished off... -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net

6 7

Question about "Open with..."
by Víctor Fernández 12 Apr '13

12 Apr '13

Hello. I'm developing an application for desktop which consist on digital treatment of images. The idea is not to open the terminal to launch the program, but there's a little problem: I don't know how Nautilus know that .jpg (or .png) files can be opened with my program, and what can I do to get this. Thanks to all!

3 8

gnome 3.8 bug with rolled-up (shaded windows) -- rh bugzilla or gnome bugzilla?
by Matthew Miller 05 Apr '13

05 Apr '13

With F19, I have a bug where shaded windows leave their decorations (specifically, the drop shadow) behind. I love the window-shade behavior (makes more sense than the dreaded minimize button), and it's kind of hard to do my daily work in F19 without it. (I know weirdness the price I pay for running F19 pre-alpha even, but, tasty dogfood and all that.) I filed this bug here https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=924406; is it more effective to instead file this in the Gnome bugzilla? -- Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁ <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>

2 2

Fedora logo on the Details panel of the GNOME control center
by Elad Alfassa 05 Apr '13

05 Apr '13

control-center-3.8.0-2.fc19 added the Fedora logo (instead of the GNOME logo) on the details panel of the GNOME desktop control center. This is a good idea, but I see two problems: 1) Use the full logotype, not just the logomark 2) The lack of the ™ symbol next to the logomark violates our own logo usage guidelines [1]. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Logo/UsageGuidelines -- -Elad Alfassa.

6 19

Re: [Design-team] Fedora logo on the Details panel of the GNOME control center
by Ryan Lerch 03 Apr '13

03 Apr '13

On 04/03/2013 10:25 AM, Ryan Lerch wrote: > On 04/03/2013 03:33 AM, Elad Alfassa wrote: >> control-center-3.8.0-2.fc19 added the Fedora logo (instead of the >> GNOME logo) on the details panel of the GNOME desktop control center. >> This is a good idea, but I see two problems: >> >> 1) Use the full logotype, not just the logomark >> 2) The lack of the ™ symbol next to the logomark violates our own >> logo usage guidelines [1]. >> >> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Logo/UsageGuidelines >> > > Elad, Thanks for bringing this up!, However, I dont have a functioning > f19 machine at the moment, would you be able to upload a screenshot so > we can see the logo as it is currently presented? > > WE i think we should also just file a bug against this component in > Fedora. Is that the correct course of action? > > --ryanlerch > After a quick look into the patch that changed the logo, it seems that it is using the following file (the image itself is supplied by the fedora-logos package): /usr/share/icons/Fedora/scalable/places/start-here.svg That file is just the logomark (the F bubble), without the "TM" If we do want the full logo (fedora + bubble) here, i *think* this is the file that should be used (once again the file itself is supplied by the fedora-logos package): /usr/share/fedora-logos/fedora_logo.svg Can anyone else throw any insight on what logo we should present here? cheers, ryanlerch

4 6

Fedora Logo on the login screen
by Ryan Lerch 02 Apr '13

02 Apr '13

I recently just updated one of my machines to Rawhide, and noticed that the Fedora logo has been moved from above the user list as in F18 [1] to the top left corner in Fedora 19 [2]. mclasen did bring up the fact (in the bootup experience megathread on fedora-devel [3]) that the logo in Fedora 19 is not very legible due to its size, but I don't understand the reasoning for why it was moved to the top left corner rather than staying above the user list. Does anyone know the rationale behind the moving and shrinking of the fedora logo to this position? regards, ryanlerch [1] - http://ryanlerch.fedorapeople.org/bootup/f18screen.png [2] - http://ryanlerch.fedorapeople.org/bootup/f19screen.png [3] - http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2013-March/179667.html

24 107

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

desktop April 2013