11:38 a.m.
QUESTION TO DEVELOPERS: Is there any hope of a full KDE 3.5
in F10, plus an upgrade path from F8 to F10 that preserves
KDE 3.5 configurations?
KDE 4.0 is incomplete and not suitable for most users.
KDE 4.1 will be incomplete and not suitable for most users.
The KDE devels are debating whether KDE 4.2 will be usable.
The pro-plasma crowd argue that it is theoretically possible
to implement a desktop by KDE 4.2, but that everyone should
change to using the folderview and forget about real desktops.
Probably control center will be fixed by KDE 4.2. It's
debatable whether Dolphin will ever have the usability that
KDE 3.5 Konqueror had, but if it does it won't be until KDE 4.2
at the earliest. F9 already includes a usable KMenu to replace
the KDE 4.0 joke, although the usable KMenu is not the default.
I'm not a KDE developer but I do have users that need to get
work done and they are not interested in a religious conversion
to plasmoids. After reading a lot of KDE developer discussions
my best guess is that KDE 4.3 is the earliest possibility for
most KDE users, but no guarantees.
This puts us in something of a quandary. F9 KDE 4.0 is hugely
annoying to most KDE users. F8 KDE 3.5 still works fine of
course but IIRC security updates will end in six months.
QUESTION TO DEVELOPERS: Is there any hope of a full KDE 3.5
in F10, plus an upgrade path from F8 to F10 that preserves
KDE 3.5 configurations?
--Mike Bird
12:18 p.m.
On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 11:38 AM, Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net> wrote:
QUESTION TO DEVELOPERS: Is there any hope of a full KDE 3.5
in F10, plus an upgrade path from F8 to F10 that preserves
KDE 3.5 configurations?
KDE 4.0 is incomplete and not suitable for most users.
KDE 4.1 will be incomplete and not suitable for most users.
The KDE devels are debating whether KDE 4.2 will be usable.
The pro-plasma crowd argue that it is theoretically possible
to implement a desktop by KDE 4.2, but that everyone should
change to using the folderview and forget about real desktops.
Probably control center will be fixed by KDE 4.2. It's
debatable whether Dolphin will ever have the usability that
KDE 3.5 Konqueror had, but if it does it won't be until KDE 4.2
at the earliest. F9 already includes a usable KMenu to replace
the KDE 4.0 joke, although the usable KMenu is not the default.
I'm not a KDE developer but I do have users that need to get
work done and they are not interested in a religious conversion
to plasmoids. After reading a lot of KDE developer discussions
my best guess is that KDE 4.3 is the earliest possibility for
most KDE users, but no guarantees.
This puts us in something of a quandary. F9 KDE 4.0 is hugely
annoying to most KDE users. F8 KDE 3.5 still works fine of
course but IIRC security updates will end in six months.
QUESTION TO DEVELOPERS: Is there any hope of a full KDE 3.5
in F10, plus an upgrade path from F8 to F10 that preserves
KDE 3.5 configurations?
--Mike Bird
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list(a)redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Any reason not to use F8? I still have F7 on my desktop.. works just fine.
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
8:01 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun, 2008-06-15 at 12:56 +0100, Anne Wilson wrote:
On Sunday 15 June 2008 12:38, Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 08:22:16 +0100
>
> Anne Wilson <cannewilson(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Fedora made the only possible decision.
>
> That's the most ridiculous statement I've ever read.
>
> Anyone still trying to delude themselves that fedora
> isn't primarily a beta test for redhat enterprise? :-).
Fedora would not exist without RHEL. Think about it.
Anne
Maybe it should be, RHEL would not exist without Fedora.
--
=======================================================================
Yawd [noun, Bostonese]: the campus of Have Id. -- Webster's Unafraid
Dictionary
=======================================================================
Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: akonstam(a)sbcglobal.net
7:22 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sunday 15 June 2008 13:07:21 Tom Horsley wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 12:56:35 +0100
Anne Wilson <cannewilson(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Anyone still trying to delude themselves that fedora
> > isn't primarily a beta test for redhat enterprise? :-).
>
> Fedora would not exist without RHEL. Think about it.
I know that, and in fact, I use fedora because it *is* a
beta test for RHEL (I like to find out what monkey wrenches
are destined to be thrown into the software I need to
support on RHEL as it moves forward :-).
I'm just constantly amused by the folks who try to pretend
that fedora is somehow something more than a beta platform
for RHEL.
And as such, it's often been said that it's not a distro for general desktop
use, particularly in a production environment. Either people can't read, or
just refuse to learn.
Anne
7:07 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 12:56:35 +0100
Anne Wilson <cannewilson(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
> Anyone still trying to delude themselves that fedora
> isn't primarily a beta test for redhat enterprise? :-).
Fedora would not exist without RHEL. Think about it.
I know that, and in fact, I use fedora because it *is* a
beta test for RHEL (I like to find out what monkey wrenches
are destined to be thrown into the software I need to
support on RHEL as it moves forward :-).
I'm just constantly amused by the folks who try to pretend
that fedora is somehow something more than a beta platform
for RHEL.
3:19 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 6:38 AM, Tom Horsley <tom.horsley(a)att.net> wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 08:22:16 +0100
Anne Wilson <cannewilson(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
> Fedora made the only possible decision.
That's the most ridiculous statement I've ever read.
Anyone still trying to delude themselves that fedora
isn't primarily a beta test for redhat enterprise? :-).
Well if you think Fedora is beta testing KDE 4 for RedHat, you're stupid.
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
3:17 p.m.
On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 9:47 AM, Timothy Murphy <gayleard(a)eircom.net> wrote:
Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> KDE 4.0 is incomplete and not suitable for most users.
>
> Not true, it is completely usable.
While the OP was over the top,
there are a surprising (to me) number of minor problems
with KDE-4 under Fedora-9.
I'm a little surprised, too, that they haven't been
sorted out sooner.
Examples: 1) "Stickiness" of applications in the panel.
When I click normally on eg my Firefox icon, nothing happens (usually).
I have to hold down the button for a second,
and sometimes I have to click a second time.
2) KNotify crashes when I shut down.
(This has been in bugzilla for ages.)
3) Sometimes I get a "ghost" image on the screen in one of my desktops,
which won't go away.
This doesn't actually matter, as I can open a window on top of it.
In spite of these minor problems, I like KDE-4
and would not revert to KDE-3 even if I could.
Maybe the Fedora/KDE team could try to sort out problems a little faster?
A popular but valid response is :
Got any bug reports?
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
3:24 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Craig White wrote:
On Fri, 2008-06-20 at 14:29 -0500, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 9:49 AM, Timothy Murphy <gayleard(a)eircom.net> wrote:
>> Mike Bird wrote:
>>
>>> My loyalty is to keeping my systems secure and my users productive.
>>> It's hard to believe that Red Hat would ship KDE 4.1 in F10, but if
>>> it does KDE users will just choose another distro and install it.
>> Speak for yourself.
>> I doubt if you speak for anyone else.
>> You certainly don't speak for this KDE user.
>>
>> --
> He is speaking for me. I was a RedHat / Fedora user 10 years, 1 month
> ago, I became an Ubuntu user.
>
> Being a beta tester for RedHat is OK as a way of life, but the other
> companies for which I test stuff give me free samples :)
>
> It never came clear to me until I read Ann Wilson's post in this
> thread: "We should always remember that Fedora
> does not set out to be the stable desktop required in most production
> situations. You use it at your peril, The fact that it actually
> works in most situations is a bonus."
>
> It never really struck me that way: if you use Fedora, you don't have
> a reason to expect that your PC will actually work. Well, I do need
> it to start up sometimes so I can read this group.
----
I wouldn't recommend using Anne's comments as a barometer for your
decision but rather your own expectations.
It is true that Fedora, since it's inception, chooses to be a leading
edge of development and yes, there is some stability that is sacrificed
for that goal. There are a number of 'stable' versions of Linux
including RHEL/RHWS/CentOS/Scientific Linux all based off RHEL or the
various Debian variations including Ubuntu/Kubuntu and SuSE, Mandriva
and so on. It never hurts to be familiar with all of the various Linux
distributions and evaluate whether one of the others meets your
expectations more than Fedora. My experience is that each Linux
distribution has its own strengths and weaknesses and that all Linux
users benefit from having options.
Generally, the notion of release early/often - even if all the features
are fully implemented is a philosophy that has served Linux and all the
packages on Linux well. In fact, it's clear that Microsoft and Apple
release their new versions of their OS with many known bugs so I see a
parallel there. When new versions of packages are incorporated, it
hopefully garners a lot of attention, useful bug reporting by users and
things are fixed over time. I actually appreciate being part of the
process and have learned that software perfection never really exists.
The best you ever get is that it performs to your expectations and I
guess I always want more.
Those on Fedora who use KDE and want everything to be perfect should
probably still be on Fedora 8 though I really have few complaints with
KDE and Fedora 9 these days...it does however suffer from feature
regression. I appreciate that this is just a temporary condition and
that many are working on rectifying these shortcomings.
By the way...I've never experienced a Fedora (i386, x86_64 or ppc)
installation that didn't work...so yeah, I actually expect it to work
and it has always met that expectation.
A very clear, well thought out response, Craig. Thank you for echoing
my feelings exactly (well, I don't use KDE. but...).
I am still on F8 for the "important" stuff, although I just set up an
F9 system because a package I needed required Tomcat6/JRE6. I am in no
way a Tomcat or Java maven and didn't want (read "didn't have time") to
try to install from tarballs. The only distro I saw with it was F9, so
it got used.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer rps2(a)nerd.com -
- Hosting Consulting, Inc. -
- -
- I.R.S.: We've got what it takes to take what you've got! -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
7:23 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 00:10 +0000, g wrote:
Craig White wrote:
<snip>
> Those on Fedora who use KDE and want everything to be perfect should
> probably still be on Fedora 8 though I really have few complaints with
i am using f8 and from what i have been thru and still going thru,
i must say that f8 is not a whole lot better than what i am reading
that f9 is like.
both seem to be proof of 'you get what you pay for'. this is not to
knock fedora, 'betas' need to be tested some where.
when ever i go to shut down kde, i play a guessing game with it. should
i bother with 'log out' or go ahead and press <ctrl+alt+bkspc>, which,
by the way, fails almost as often as 'log out'.
i do believe that it would be better to delay a release when so many
bugs are present. if a lot of bugs are known and left for later update,
i believe that it would be better to at least have a 'bug list' included.
then we, as 'testers' would at least know what to watch out for.
granted, developers will never know where all bugs are, but at least it
would be nice to know about 'known bugs' when they release. in fact, if
i had a 'known bugs list' i just might enjoy being a guinea pig. :o)
----
I have a lot of machines running Fedora 8 / KDE and none experience the
issue you are talking about. I suspect there is a problem with your
installation because that is not an issue with Fedora 8/KDE.
As for the notion of you get what you pay for...this is essentially a
community project and you can participate as much or as little as you
wish. If you have discovered bugs, the idea is to report them to
bugzilla so they can be fixed. Granted at this stage, a packager isn't
likely to spend much time on a problem that is in F-8 but not in F-9.
Craig
9:15 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Mike Bird wrote:
On Sat June 21 2008 16:53:07 David Boles wrote:
KDE 4.0 was released on schedule in January. KDE 4.1 is still on track
for July.
So you did see the proposed schedule? And were aware of the possible problems.
Good work.
Most Fedora and Ubuntu releases are on time. Which distro do you
use?
I use Fedora. I normally use Rawhide because I do not have a production
system. I can live with the often problems. Since i do not really follow
releases, mine is a daily release, I don't recall if it was Fedora 7 or Fedora
8 that was late.
Yes, I answered your questions.
We installed F9 on test boxes. F9 is not deployable because of KDE 4.
We did not put F9 on any production boxes.
Please see the subject of this thread. The question is not whether
people were surprised by KDE 4. Everyone knows KDE 4 will take a
while before it's useful. Even Aaron is disappointed that critical
functionality missed not only 4.0 but also 4.1.
The question is whether Fedora would provide a migration path by
supporting KDE 3.5 in F10. And the answer was a resounding "this
is too difficult so go use another distro".
Hmm... so you are saying that Fedora should continue to provide support for
KDE 3.5.9. A DM that has, it appears, been dropped by KDE for their new
release. KDE 4.x.
Since, again it appears, that there won't be any new KDE 3.5.9 'stuff' from
KDE just what would you expect Fedora to do? Write 'stuff' for KDE?
If you read what Anne wrote Mandriva is trying the duel path. And it fails
miserably. So you want Fedora to follow that path too? Why?
One question. If, *if*, KDE is mission critical for you just why did you/are
upgrading? Why not wait for Fedora 10 and a maybe more stable KDE?
It has been years ago but I seem to recall a very similar situation when KDE
went from 2.x to 3.x.
If you tried KDE 4.0 and it was not suitable I gather that you stayed with F-8
and KDE 3.5.9? Or did you upgrade anyway? Bitching and whining about this
solves nothing. Fedora is *not* in control of what KDE does. But *you* are in
control of what you do with your machines.
And as for a "a migration path"? You have one. Stay with stable Fedora 8/KDE
3.5.9 or upgrade to Fedora 9 with KDE 4.x and live with it untill it functions
as you wish. The choice *is* yours to make. Do it. Or don't do it. Pick one.
As for complaining? Wrong list. Go to a KDE list, or their bugzilla, and bitch
and whine there.
This topic is getting boring. I'm done here.
--
David
10:58 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
David Boles wrote:
Mike Bird wrote:
> On Sat June 21 2008 16:11:26 Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> When KDE 4.0 was released in January a consensus was reached that major
> releases of KDE 4 should occur at six month intervals. Although there
> has been some discussion of four month cycles, the consensus for six
> month cycles still seems to be firm:
>
> KDE release -in-> Fedora
> 4.0 Jan '08 F9 May '08
> 4.1 Jul '08 F10 Nov '08
> 4.2 Jan '09 F11 May '09
> 4.3 Jul '09 F12 Nov '09
Hey Mike. Have you ever seen software released when it was scheduled to be
released? ;-) Not games (especially games), not drivers, not anything.
Except Linux distro releases. And those slip too.
Some slip so they can fix bugs, some ship bugs so they can be on time. :-(
There's a reason why Linux kernels sometimes get to -rc7,
I am truly sorry that you are disappointed with KDE 4.0. Really. But
there it
is. deal with it as it is and wait for improvements. Make suggestions,
in the
correct places, and go on.
Did you miss the subject? The suggestion is that KDE 3.5 be included, as
it is in RHEL, SuSE-11, Kubuntu, etc.
I don't recall if you replied to my basic questions about this situation.
Did you look first? Live-CD try first? Or just jump in? If you skipped
one, or
two, or both one and two, you should be kicking your own butt for your
'problems' and not Fedora's and the KDE team. IMO.
Does it matter? If he tried the pre-releases, alpha and beta, and said
"KDE doesn't work," would the team have stayed with KDE 3.5? No, because
the decision wasn't made on the basis of functionality, and AFAIK the
KDE developers view of how the user interface should work has changed,
and it will NEVER be "improved" because they want it to work differently.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen(a)tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
11:08 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Thursday 26 June 2008, Bill Davidsen wrote:
David Boles wrote:
> Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan
>> <pocallaghan(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Well the main idea behind PA is to eradicate that problem since it
>> will be a super set
>
> And, as I said, I have no problems with Pulseaudio. Why? Well I have a
> desktop
> with 'normal' hardware. I don't have anything fancy. And, for me Fedora
> works
> 'out of the box'. Actually I normally (currently) run rawhide and I only
> have
> the 'development breakage', to be expected, from time to time.
>
> I won't name, on the Fedora list, the other Linux distros that I have
> installed and that run with no, or minor, problems. But there are nine
> of them.
Awwww, Gee. We still have the 1st amendment here.
> So? Am I just lucky? Or do I just have compatible hardware? Or do
I just
> not
> try to do "strange things'? I can't say.
Have you ever tried to use a microphone or line input for recording or
telephony? I have four system, all of which worked pre-PA, none of which
work with PA, all of which work with PA removed, for both ALSA and
simulated OSS applications. So if trying to get sound into the computer
is "strange things," then I guess I do them.
As do I, David. And PA wrecked it all until I had gotten out the knife and
removed as much of it as I could. This is not to say that something like PA
isn't potentially useful, but to ship a completely broken PA, and then the only
help offered was the advice to remove it, seems to be highly counter-productive
to getting it, or something like it, working.
However, here on this system PA was a solution (if it worked, I'm dubious) in
search of a problem I didn't have.
--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Who messed with my anti-paranoia shot?
10:56 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
AnneWilson wrote:
On Thursday 26 June 2008 17:08:28 Gene Heskett wrote:
> As do I, David. And PA wrecked it all until I had gotten out the knife and
> removed as much of it as I could. This is not to say that something like
> PA isn't potentially useful, but to ship a completely broken PA, and then
> the only help offered was the advice to remove it, seems to be highly
> counter-productive to getting it, or something like it, working.
>
> However, here on this system PA was a solution (if it worked, I'm dubious)
> in search of a problem I didn't have.
The funny thing is that on this system I can't get anything from the onboard
sound, and I frequently get a 'falling back to pulse-audio'. So far, PA has
played everything.
The problem is that for telephony or sound recording you really need
recording. It doesn't matter how well it plays sound you have, if you
can no longer get new sound in.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen(a)tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
10:53 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
AnneWilson wrote:
On Thursday 26 June 2008 16:58:56 Bill Davidsen wrote:
> and it will NEVER be "improved" because they want it to work differently.
So in your opinion 'different' can't ever be better?
I define an improvement as doing something "better," as in faster, using
fewer resources, more reliable, or with increased quality. So doing
something else isn't an improvement, can't BE an improvement, it's just
a work-around because the original functionality has been broken or
removed by design.
Like the highway dept telling me that they have put in a six lane
divided highway, which improves my travel experience to a long detour to
get where I want to go.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen(a)tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
9:39 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Thursday 26 June 2008, Craig White wrote:
On Thu, 2008-06-26 at 21:29 +0100, AnneWilson wrote:
> On Thursday 26 June 2008 17:08:28 Gene Heskett wrote:
> > As do I, David. And PA wrecked it all until I had gotten out the knife
> > and removed as much of it as I could. This is not to say that something
> > like PA isn't potentially useful, but to ship a completely broken PA,
> > and then the only help offered was the advice to remove it, seems to be
> > highly counter-productive to getting it, or something like it, working.
> >
> > However, here on this system PA was a solution (if it worked, I'm
> > dubious) in search of a problem I didn't have.
>
> The funny thing is that on this system I can't get anything from the
> onboard sound, and I frequently get a 'falling back to pulse-audio'. So
> far, PA has played everything.
----
Gene struggled with pulseaudio and skype and multiple sound cards...his
situation was largely untypical (what a shock).
Humm, now if one is going to use skype or ekiga, why not set it up to use a
dedicated sound card so one isn't constantly tearing up a working audio system
just to use an internet telephone? To me it made perfect sense to separate the
functions at the outset & do away with all the tomfoolery and config clashes
inherent in trying to make one sound card do it all?
Along with running GUI as root, building packages from source as
root,
Gene sometimes is the poster boy for 'What not to do in Linux' - I'd
hardly give his opinions on pulseaudio a second thought.
Gee, Craig, that from you is so mild it is almost praise. But let me advise you
about me just a wee bit in case you've forgotten.
I have never, ever fit the mold you want all the sheeple to fit into, and likely
never will. Time, I'll give you, has caught up with me in my 7th decade, but I
was fixing radios & tv's for a living while your parents were still in grammer
school reading McGuffies if they were lucky. If they hadn't been born yet in
1946, then they sadly missed out on one of teachings best tools ever.
Steve Ciarcia, editor/owner of Circuit Cellar Ink magazine said it best when we
got into a discussion about education vs experience when he wrote to me and
said "The only sheepskin that really counts is the one you sleep on."
Mine is for the most part, pretty comfortable. How is yours?
Yeah go ahead, call me a crotchety old fart. I'll buy Andy Rooney at least one
of whatever he drinks if I ever get a chance to do it, I think we would see eye
to eye on a lot of things called by various PC names, but which he and I will
call common sense.
Now back to your regularly scheduled cat herding.
Craig
--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Hard work never killed anybody, but why take a chance?
-- Charlie McCarthy
5:20 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Bill Davidsen <davidsen <at> tmr.com> writes:
I have the impression that for some users it will never be suitable,
because it is not an issue of bugs in the code, or missing features
which will be added, but a change in the underlying philosophy of how
users should use the desktop. And if the deliberate change doesn't suit
your preferred operation, you're in the market for either KDElegacy.org
or a totally new WM and utils.
With the folderview applet (plasmoid) in KDE 4.1, you'll be able to use your
desktop as a traditional desktop. (KDE 4.0 tries to support it, but the
implementation as one plasmoid per icon is suboptimal, it will be better in
4.1.) You can also have more than one desktop folder, but the default will be
only one, ~/Desktop, as usual.
Kevin Kofler
3:40 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Thu, 2008-06-26 at 21:29 +0100, AnneWilson wrote:
On Thursday 26 June 2008 17:08:28 Gene Heskett wrote:
> As do I, David. And PA wrecked it all until I had gotten out the knife and
> removed as much of it as I could. This is not to say that something like
> PA isn't potentially useful, but to ship a completely broken PA, and then
> the only help offered was the advice to remove it, seems to be highly
> counter-productive to getting it, or something like it, working.
>
> However, here on this system PA was a solution (if it worked, I'm dubious)
> in search of a problem I didn't have.
The funny thing is that on this system I can't get anything from the onboard
sound, and I frequently get a 'falling back to pulse-audio'. So far, PA has
played everything.
----
Gene struggled with pulseaudio and skype and multiple sound cards...his
situation was largely untypical (what a shock).
Along with running GUI as root, building packages from source as root,
Gene sometimes is the poster boy for 'What not to do in Linux' - I'd
hardly give his opinions on pulseaudio a second thought.
Craig
3:29 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Thursday 26 June 2008 17:08:28 Gene Heskett wrote:
As do I, David. And PA wrecked it all until I had gotten out the
knife and
removed as much of it as I could. This is not to say that something like
PA isn't potentially useful, but to ship a completely broken PA, and then
the only help offered was the advice to remove it, seems to be highly
counter-productive to getting it, or something like it, working.
However, here on this system PA was a solution (if it worked, I'm dubious)
in search of a problem I didn't have.
The funny thing is that on this system I can't get anything from the onboard
sound, and I frequently get a 'falling back to pulse-audio'. So far, PA has
played everything.
Anne
10:44 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Mike Bird wrote:
On Fri June 20 2008 18:50:45 David Boles wrote:
> But you do know that you new distro will switch to KDE 4.0 soon too right?
Your definition of "soon" must be different than mine:
Fedora will support KDE 3.5 until approximately December 2008.
Kubuntu will support KDE 3.5 until approximately October 2009.
Debian will support KDE 3.5 until maybe 2011 or 2012.
CentOS-5.2 has 3.5 KDE, I
presume the underlying RHEL will be around for
the usual years.
I'm expecting KDE 4.2 or KDE 4.3 to be suitable for prime time.
I have the impression that for some users it will never be suitable,
because it is not an issue of bugs in the code, or missing features
which will be added, but a change in the underlying philosophy of how
users should use the desktop. And if the deliberate change doesn't suit
your preferred operation, you're in the market for either KDElegacy.org
or a totally new WM and utils.
They should arrive in Fedora in May 2009 and November 2009.
That leaves Fedora without support for a prime time KDE for
several months. There's no such gap with Debian or Kubuntu.
Other distros are also shipping KDE 3.5 alongside KDE 4.x but
I haven't analyzed their timetables.
--Mike Bird
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen(a)tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
10:32 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
David Boles wrote:
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan
> <pocallaghan(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Well the main idea behind PA is to eradicate that problem since it
> will be a super set
And, as I said, I have no problems with Pulseaudio. Why? Well I have a
desktop
with 'normal' hardware. I don't have anything fancy. And, for me Fedora
works
'out of the box'. Actually I normally (currently) run rawhide and I only
have
the 'development breakage', to be expected, from time to time.
I won't name, on the Fedora list, the other Linux distros that I have
installed and that run with no, or minor, problems. But there are nine
of them.
So? Am I just lucky? Or do I just have compatible hardware? Or do I just
not
try to do "strange things'? I can't say.
Have you ever tried to use a microphone or line input for recording or
telephony? I have four system, all of which worked pre-PA, none of which
work with PA, all of which work with PA removed, for both ALSA and
simulated OSS applications. So if trying to get sound into the computer
is "strange things," then I guess I do them.
I mentioned before about a Linux problem and dumping a ZIP Drive to
solve it.
That was with Mandrake 7.0. Circa 2000 or so.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen(a)tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
10:10 a.m.
New subject: [OT] Are security updates necessary?
Mike Bird wrote:
On Sun June 15 2008 17:50:16 Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 7:09 PM, Bill Davidsen <davidsen(a)tmr.com> wrote:
>> The problem is that "use your machine" for most people is not limited
to
>> playing solitaire on a machine without network connections.
> Buy a router? Use the software firewall?
Neither protects against security holes in web browsers,
mail clients, word processors, etc. Any web page you
visit, any email you read, any image you view, any
document you read ... could contain malformed data
trying to exploit buffer overflow or other security bugs.
In a review of OpenSuSE 11 one reviewer praised using the 3.5 KDE parts
to provide functionality. I have the impression from what he said that
their KDE is mostly 4 with a helping of 3.5 to provide working versions
of some things which aren't properly functional in 4.x.
Either they're more trusting than Fedora, or less concerned with being
bleeding edge vs. functional, or just less influenced by KDE folks to
get the new stuff out there.
As for security, CentOS-5.2 (and the underlying RHEL) use KDE 3.5, so I
assume that there is a security enhanced 3.5 available for Fedora if the
decision were made on technical capability, rather than some goal to
have the latest stuff, be it functional for users or not. So either you
are saying that the KDE in RHEL is insecure, or that Fedora chose not to
provide the previous functionality for users, even though you have an
enterprise 3.5 in-house.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen(a)tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
12:12 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 8:57 AM, Timothy Murphy <gayleard(a)eircom.net> wrote:
David Boles wrote:
One thing that slightly surprises me is that having a server
that runs 5 times as fast, with 4 times as much memory,
as my greatly-loved ancient Asus server
does not in fact seem to speed anything up noticeably.
I am guessing your network is your current bottleneck
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
10:35 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Mon, 2008-06-23 at 14:57 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:
One thing that slightly surprises me is that having a server
that runs 5 times as fast, with 4 times as much memory,
as my greatly-loved ancient Asus server
does not in fact seem to speed anything up noticeably.
A computer spends much of its time doing nothing, faster PCs have more
spare time.
Do something that does require lots of computing, such as ray tracing,
3D game video generation, video MPEG encoding, etc., and you will notice
the difference.
For other less intensive tasks, word processing, etc., much of the
slowness is down to other things, like the disc drive (starting the
program, opening/saving data, loading fonts, etc.). Which is much much
slower than the processor.
Likewise with booting a computer, we spend a lot of time waiting for
things to load, more than we spend waiting for actual computing.
Although the parsing of plain text configuration files can be quite a
slow down. You'll notice Squid and Apache, for example, are much
quicker to start up on older computers if you strip out all the comments
in the text file.
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.25.6-55.fc9.i686
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.
8:57 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
David Boles wrote:
A sensible person would run CentOS, or RHEL, or one of the many
others,
for a server. It would be foolish to run any distro, such as Fedora, there
are many others, in a production type situation.
I'm glad, and a little surprised, to find that I am not "foolish",
at least in this regard.
I feel I should be given a "sensible" badge.
I acquired an incredibly cheap Dell server a few months ago,
and somewhat to my surprise found the only OS's they supported
were Centos and Windows Server (ie not what I regard as standard Windows).
In fact the whole setup was Centos- or at least Linux-based,
even if you were using Windows Server.
I must admit Centos (5.1) has run faultlessly since I got the server.
I'm pretty sure I would have had a few problems if I had been running F-9.
One thing that slightly surprises me is that having a server
that runs 5 times as fast, with 4 times as much memory,
as my greatly-loved ancient Asus server
does not in fact seem to speed anything up noticeably.
7:32 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 20:41 -0400, Kelly Miller wrote:
On June 22, 2008 8:00:27 am Marcelo Magno T. Sales wrote:
> Em Domingo 22 Junho 2008, Kelly Miller escreveu:
> > > And don't give me the crap that Fedora is bleeding edge software.
> > > F9 is beyond bleeding, its suicidal.
> >
> > Actually, I find that greatly ironic, as I switched temporarily to
> > openSUSE because IMO Fedora isn't moving fast ENOUGH for my taste. I
> > really really want to run KDE 4.1 (which IS most definitely usable as
> > a desktop, and a rather excellent one I might add), but Fedora only
> > has it in Rawhide, and uh... Rawhide blows up way too often for my
> > liking. I'm probably going to switch back to Fedora when KDE 4.1 is
> > finally released for Fedora 9.
>
> KDE 4.0.83 is available for Fedora in kde-redhat unstable repo. It works
> quite well.
>
> []'s
> Marcelo
That had to have changed recently (as in, the last month or so), because I
actually checked for a F-9 port of KDE 4.1 beta in kde-redhat when I upgraded,
and didn't find one. I always hook into kde-redhat, even though it's not as
much use now as it was when I started with FC5 (since most of what kde-redhat
had is now in Fedora itself).
I installed it last night. Seems to work mostly.
poc
1:47 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Mon, 2008-06-23 at 00:32 -0400, Claude Jones wrote:
There's someone on this list who is running a huge cluster of
Fedora
servers doing scientific work in a Govt. agency. There are many, many
others running Fedora in production situations...
In business, you use whatever does the job. While some are precious
about using only particular things, others only care about results. If
Fedora does it, you can use it.
For my money, it certainly couldn't be worse than Windows. :-)
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.25.6-55.fc9.i686
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.
1:41 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 22:18 -0400, David Boles wrote:
A sensible person would run CentOS, or RHEL, or one of the many
others, for a server. It would be foolish to run any distro, such as
Fedora, there are many others, in a production type situation.
Something that changes as often, as quickly, and a radically as Fedora
does not, would not, be a good choice for a stable LAN or production
system.
I could imagine the situation where you run a fairly simple server, one
that does just one or two things (like a webserver without extensive
databases), and if you were an admin that were always keeping up to date
with updates, that there's not a great deal of difference between
updating a collection of RPMs, to updating all of them with a new
distro.
But once you make a server complicated (throw in mail, databases, user
file storage, etc.), rapid distro updating does become a much greater
nuisance, and you will want a base system with a longer life.
I can't say that I've really come across updates that made a system
unstable or plain broken. And that sort of thing could just as easily
happen while updating packages on another distro with a longer life than
Fedora.
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.25.6-55.fc9.i686
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.
11:32 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun June 22 2008, David Boles wrote:
So tell me Ric. What would you call someone that would do this,
described
above? Bob? Fred? Or a fool?
There's someone on this list who is running a huge cluster of Fedora servers
doing scientific work in a Govt. agency. There are many, many others running
Fedora in production situations... They post here all the time. So, I think
Bob and Fred ought to tell David to get off his high horse - the fact that he
can't imagine such uses doesn't mean that his pontifications are with merit.
But, I doubt they'll do much good.
--
Claude Jones
Brunswick, MD, USA
11:24 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
David Boles <dgboles <at> gmail.com> writes:
So what are you saying here? Yahoo should run Fedora on theri
servers? Or Google? Or NASA?
NASA actually uses Fedora on some of their machines. They do also use RHEL
though. See Jack Aboutboul's account:
http://jaboutboul.blogspot.com/2008/02/fedora-on-final-frontier.html
Kevin Kofler
11:02 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Mike Bird wrote:
On Sun June 22 2008 19:18:46 David Boles wrote:
> A sensible person would run CentOS, or RHEL, or one of the many others, for
> a server. It would be foolish to run any distro, such as Fedora, there are
> many others, in a production type situation.
Would it meet your definition of "foolish" for a Gnome user such as yourself
to keep posting off-topic comments about servers in a KDE thread discussing
production workstations - i.e. workstations used for office work, web design,
software development, systems management, etc?
GNOME and KDE have little to do with this. KDE and GNOME are DM. Desktops.
Pretty GUIs.
If you use 'real' application for your work they should work in either.
Actually they should work in X alone and not need either GNOME or KGE at all.
I now consider myself foolish for trying to discuss this with those that will
not be helped.
Enjoy KDE 4.x and have a nice day.
--
David
10:54 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Craig White wrote:
On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 22:19 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>> 2. It attaches a negative aspersion to anyone who doesn't agree with
>> your thinking.
> Doesn't mean it's wrong.
----
There's a philosophy on the ruby on rails list - in fact all ruby lists
relating to the author of the ruby language...Matz
MINASWAN (Matz is nice and so we are nice)
It would serve this list well too because the insults are so pointless
and tiring.
Now wait a minute. I said that IMO to run a Fedora install as a for real,
important, have to have working server and to run the same OS on the same
system where this really needs to work to pay the bills was, again IMO,
foolish. So what are you saying here? Yahoo should run Fedora on theri
servers? Or Google? Or NASA?
Get real. They use the 'real stuff'. Ya' know supported, stable, etc.
I use fedora because I want to do so. But I do not use Fedora, or any other
Linux disro, as the source of my income.
I did *not* say that Linux was bad. I did *not* say that Fedora was bad. What
I said was that using a rolling target like Fedora for your livelihood was
not, IMO, a great idea. You might think differently.
--
David
10:28 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 22:19 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> 2. It attaches a negative aspersion to anyone who doesn't
agree with
> your thinking.
Doesn't mean it's wrong.
----
There's a philosophy on the ruby on rails list - in fact all ruby lists
relating to the author of the ruby language...Matz
MINASWAN (Matz is nice and so we are nice)
It would serve this list well too because the insults are so pointless
and tiring.
Craig
10:19 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 9:45 PM, Craig White <craigwhite(a)azapple.com> wrote:
On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 22:18 -0400, David Boles wrote:
> Ric Moore wrote:
> > On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 05:56 +0000, g wrote:
> >
> > It might be better to avoid the use of "labels" as much as possible.
I
> > know it's hard to do in practice. Sadly, I have my share of favorites.
> > "Idiot" just rolls off the fingers when typing it. So does
"Twit".
> > That's a really good one. "Stupid" gets my hackles up though,
I'll
> > battle on that one. <cackles>
> >
> > Again, it's better to not use them at all. Ric
>
>
> A sensible person would run CentOS, or RHEL, or one of the many others, for a
> server. It would be foolish to run any distro, such as Fedora, there are many
> others, in a production type situation. Something that changes as often, as
> quickly, and a radically as Fedora does not, would not, be a good choice for a
> stable LAN or production system. Only if you want to be cheap and get 'the
> free stuff' would it make sense. And then 'they' would have to deal with
the
> problems.
>
> So tell me Ric. What would you call someone that would do this, described
> above? Bob? Fred? Or a fool?
----
I have a problem with this thinking...
1. It presupposes what you are calling a production server.
A server where you're not regularly adding new features to its software lineup
2. It attaches a negative aspersion to anyone who doesn't agree
with
your thinking.
Doesn't mean it's wrong.
I can think of several scenarios off the top of my head where a
Fedora
server would probably be preferable to CentOS/RHEL...
- Thin client server (like LTSP) where I want newer end user
applications.
I would think you would wanted tested, proven and stable apps for such a thing.
- Special application server like Ruby on Rails that does things
like
image manipulation.
I don't see what that has to do with Centos vs. Fedora.
So yes, I do think it's not only possible but sometimes useful if
not
necessary to use something a little more bleeding edge than stable as a
server and not at all foolish.
Possible, but rare. To each their own I guess.
Please stop with the over-arching characterizations that only serve
to
further your narrow point of view.
.....
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
10:04 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun June 22 2008 19:18:46 David Boles wrote:
A sensible person would run CentOS, or RHEL, or one of the many
others, for
a server. It would be foolish to run any distro, such as Fedora, there are
many others, in a production type situation.
Would it meet your definition of "foolish" for a Gnome user such as yourself
to keep posting off-topic comments about servers in a KDE thread discussing
production workstations - i.e. workstations used for office work, web design,
software development, systems management, etc?
--Mike Bird
9:45 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 22:18 -0400, David Boles wrote:
Ric Moore wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 05:56 +0000, g wrote:
>
> It might be better to avoid the use of "labels" as much as possible. I
> know it's hard to do in practice. Sadly, I have my share of favorites.
> "Idiot" just rolls off the fingers when typing it. So does
"Twit".
> That's a really good one. "Stupid" gets my hackles up though,
I'll
> battle on that one. <cackles>
>
> Again, it's better to not use them at all. Ric
A sensible person would run CentOS, or RHEL, or one of the many others, for a
server. It would be foolish to run any distro, such as Fedora, there are many
others, in a production type situation. Something that changes as often, as
quickly, and a radically as Fedora does not, would not, be a good choice for a
stable LAN or production system. Only if you want to be cheap and get 'the
free stuff' would it make sense. And then 'they' would have to deal with the
problems.
So tell me Ric. What would you call someone that would do this, described
above? Bob? Fred? Or a fool?
----
I have a problem with this thinking...
1. It presupposes what you are calling a production server.
2. It attaches a negative aspersion to anyone who doesn't agree with
your thinking.
I can think of several scenarios off the top of my head where a Fedora
server would probably be preferable to CentOS/RHEL...
- Thin client server (like LTSP) where I want newer end user
applications.
- Special application server like Ruby on Rails that does things like
image manipulation.
So yes, I do think it's not only possible but sometimes useful if not
necessary to use something a little more bleeding edge than stable as a
server and not at all foolish.
Please stop with the over-arching characterizations that only serve to
further your narrow point of view.
Craig
9:18 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Ric Moore wrote:
On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 05:56 +0000, g wrote:
It might be better to avoid the use of "labels" as much as possible. I
know it's hard to do in practice. Sadly, I have my share of favorites.
"Idiot" just rolls off the fingers when typing it. So does "Twit".
That's a really good one. "Stupid" gets my hackles up though, I'll
battle on that one. <cackles>
Again, it's better to not use them at all. Ric
A sensible person would run CentOS, or RHEL, or one of the many others, for a
server. It would be foolish to run any distro, such as Fedora, there are many
others, in a production type situation. Something that changes as often, as
quickly, and a radically as Fedora does not, would not, be a good choice for a
stable LAN or production system. Only if you want to be cheap and get 'the
free stuff' would it make sense. And then 'they' would have to deal with the
problems.
So tell me Ric. What would you call someone that would do this, described
above? Bob? Fred? Or a fool?
BTW:
Main Entry:
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French fol, from Late Latin follis, from
Latin, bellows, bag; akin to Old High German bolla blister, balg bag — more at
belly
Date: 13th century
1: a person lacking in judgment or prudence
<snip>
--
David
9:04 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 05:56 +0000, g wrote:
David Boles wrote:
> Then, if I was you I would run to these other distros and drop Fedora
> like a hot brick. Oh, BTW, IMO *anyone* that would use Fedora version
> anything in a production environment is a fool. Fedora itself has said
> that. Many times.
david,
please do not call someone a 'fool'. dumb, stupid, crazy, or insane.
but never a 'fool'.
if you do not understand why i say this, please contact me _off_list_
and i will be glad to explain.
It might be better to avoid the use of "labels" as much as possible. I
know it's hard to do in practice. Sadly, I have my share of favorites.
"Idiot" just rolls off the fingers when typing it. So does "Twit".
That's a really good one. "Stupid" gets my hackles up though, I'll
battle on that one. <cackles>
Again, it's better to not use them at all. Ric
----------------------------------------------------
My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
Linux user# 44256 Sign up at: http://counter.li.org/
http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/oar
https://oar.dev.java.net/
Verizon Cell # 336-254-1339
-----------------------------------------------------
7:41 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On June 22, 2008 8:00:27 am Marcelo Magno T. Sales wrote:
Em Domingo 22 Junho 2008, Kelly Miller escreveu:
> > And don't give me the crap that Fedora is bleeding edge software.
> > F9 is beyond bleeding, its suicidal.
>
> Actually, I find that greatly ironic, as I switched temporarily to
> openSUSE because IMO Fedora isn't moving fast ENOUGH for my taste. I
> really really want to run KDE 4.1 (which IS most definitely usable as
> a desktop, and a rather excellent one I might add), but Fedora only
> has it in Rawhide, and uh... Rawhide blows up way too often for my
> liking. I'm probably going to switch back to Fedora when KDE 4.1 is
> finally released for Fedora 9.
KDE 4.0.83 is available for Fedora in kde-redhat unstable repo. It works
quite well.
[]'s
Marcelo
That had to have changed recently (as in, the last month or so), because I
actually checked for a F-9 port of KDE 4.1 beta in kde-redhat when I upgraded,
and didn't find one. I always hook into kde-redhat, even though it's not as
much use now as it was when I started with FC5 (since most of what kde-redhat
had is now in Fedora itself).
12:41 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Francis Earl <francis.earl <at> gmail.com> writes:
If you really want KDE3, just set up a repo in Koji and be done with
it.
Koji personal repos are not implemented yet.
KDE doesn't even have any type of SELinux support, so the leading
reason
for using Fedora isn't even applicable for it...
Huh? The point of SELinux is that it should just work, i.e. not get in the way
and not need special "support", and that should be the case at this point. Not
that SELinux is that useful anyway for the average user...
Kevin Kofler
7 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Em Domingo 22 Junho 2008, Kelly Miller escreveu:
> And don't give me the crap that Fedora is bleeding edge
software.
> F9 is beyond bleeding, its suicidal.
Actually, I find that greatly ironic, as I switched temporarily to
openSUSE because IMO Fedora isn't moving fast ENOUGH for my taste. I
really really want to run KDE 4.1 (which IS most definitely usable as
a desktop, and a rather excellent one I might add), but Fedora only
has it in Rawhide, and uh... Rawhide blows up way too often for my
liking. I'm probably going to switch back to Fedora when KDE 4.1 is
finally released for Fedora 9.
KDE 4.0.83 is available for Fedora in kde-redhat unstable repo. It works
quite well.
[]'s
Marcelo
2:26 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Actually, I find that greatly ironic, as I switched temporarily to
openSUSE
because IMO Fedora isn't moving fast ENOUGH for my taste.
I too did this briefly, but they can't even keep their mirrors
operational on release day, and the system gets in your way entirely too
much, so I'm back...
I really really
want to run KDE 4.1 (which IS most definitely usable as a desktop, and a
rather excellent one I might add)
I disagree for many uses of usable. It lacks entirely too much still
(4.00.82) for my liking. It's currently worse than Gnome for hiding
features and the like... I truly despise what I've seen of their
current direction, and there is now truly nothing that seperates KDE
from anything else. QGTKStyle ensures the apps will look native in
Gnome too, so I think I've lost interest in KDE entirely.
Actually, the whole KDE argument was bound to be brought up.
I really don't understand it at all honestly. Fedora is about forward
looking software, why would it continue to support software that is no
longer maintained? If you really want KDE3, just set up a repo in Koji
and be done with it. Supporting KDE3 when there is KDE4 is _exactly_ the
sort of thing that is APPEALING about Fedora. KDE3 is getting _very_
little maintenance since KDE4 was released, so it would add even more of
a burden on developers. If you disagree with the rationale, go find a
distro that still has it!
The KDE team will hate me for saying this, but what kind of respectable
KDE user uses a non-KDE distro anyways? The man-power behind KDE on
Fedora is pathetic - and I honestly hope it doesn't get better. Fedora
is a Gnome distro, and new features are considered with Gnome in mind.
KDE doesn't even have any type of SELinux support, so the leading reason
for using Fedora isn't even applicable for it... this isn't going to
change either, the bulk of KDE based distros are using AppArmor.
Before you rebuff this with "You're a Gnome zealot blah blah blah", I
was a KDE zealot for about 5 years, I just got sick of all the memory
leaks (kio_http and kio_file mostly) and the constant breakages. This
still hasn't been fixed. After about 10 days of using KDE, _all_ of my
RAM is always used (2 gigs), that is unacceptable, especially when 1.2
gigs is resident RAM. Makes it hard to do other useful things like run a
web server etc... not to mention having hard drives spinning due to swap
is _loud_.
(this post isn't directed entirely at yourself, just in general at this
thread)
1:16 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
And don't give me the crap that Fedora is bleeding edge software.
F9
is beyond bleeding, its suicidal.
Actually, I find that greatly ironic, as I switched temporarily to openSUSE
because IMO Fedora isn't moving fast ENOUGH for my taste. I really really
want to run KDE 4.1 (which IS most definitely usable as a desktop, and a
rather excellent one I might add), but Fedora only has it in Rawhide, and
uh... Rawhide blows up way too often for my liking. I'm probably going to
switch back to Fedora when KDE 4.1 is finally released for Fedora 9.
Actually, the whole KDE argument was bound to be brought up; I know a number
of people mentioned that KDE 4.0 was likely to drive longtime KDE 3.5 users
crazy. However, I can see the logic in trying to move towards it, as it gives
the devs and packagers a chance to find and fix bugs and figure out what's
missing before KDE 4.1...
12:56 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
David Boles wrote:
Then, if I was you I would run to these other distros and drop Fedora
like a hot brick. Oh, BTW, IMO *anyone* that would use Fedora version
anything in a production environment is a fool. Fedora itself has said
that. Many times.
david,
please do not call someone a 'fool'. dumb, stupid, crazy, or insane.
but never a 'fool'.
if you do not understand why i say this, please contact me _off_list_
and i will be glad to explain.
--
tc,hago.
g
.
in a free world without fences, who needs gates.
10:07 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Mike Bird wrote:
On Sat June 21 2008 19:15:57 David Boles wrote:
David, you asked this question. I answered it. You asked if I had
answered your question and asked your question again. I answered
your question again. Now you reply to my answer to your question by
asking the same question again. We tested F9 but we did not deploy
F9 because of KDE 4.
You have already admitted that you're a Gnome user rather than a KDE
user. Yet you have posted 17 times in this KDE thread, repeating the
same questions over and over again.
Admited> No. I stated that I am a GNOME user.
KDE has done nothing wrong. The problem is that Fedora is the only
distro not supporting KDE 3.5 until KDE 4 is ready for prime time.
And the solution, which has been repeatedly expressed here, is for
people using KDE in production environments to switch to a different
distro. End of story.
Then, if I was you I would run to these other distros and drop Fedora like a
hot brick. Oh, BTW, IMO *anyone* that would use Fedora version anything in a
production environment is a fool. Fedora itself has said that. Many times.
--
David
9:45 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Craig White wrote:
On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 20:28 -0400, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 23:24 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> Craig White <craigwhite <at> azapple.com> writes:
>>> People who do software development wouldn't care whether it's KDE 3.5
or
>>> KDE 4
>> Actually they'll want KDE 4. Who wants to develop against an obsolete API?
> KDE developers, sure. There's other software in the world than
> GUI-based desktop apps.
----
and it was this class that I was referring to.
people who develop software can maneuver around little things that are
missing or don't seem to work properly.
the issue of unleashing KDE-4 on less technically skilled, un-savvy
computer users is something that I'm still balking at but I'm not
complaining...just noting. I have no choice because I am dealing with a
bunch of users that save files to their desktop and drag them where they
want them and simply do not understand file-save dialog boxes and how to
move around in them.
That sounds like quite a task.
--
David
9:32 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat June 21 2008 19:15:57 David Boles wrote:
If you tried KDE 4.0 and it was not suitable I gather that you stayed
with
F-8 and KDE 3.5.9? Or did you upgrade anyway? Bitching and whining about
this solves nothing.
David, you asked this question. I answered it. You asked if I had
answered your question and asked your question again. I answered
your question again. Now you reply to my answer to your question by
asking the same question again. We tested F9 but we did not deploy
F9 because of KDE 4.
You have already admitted that you're a Gnome user rather than a KDE
user. Yet you have posted 17 times in this KDE thread, repeating the
same questions over and over again.
As for complaining? Wrong list. Go to a KDE list, or their bugzilla,
and
bitch and whine there.
KDE has done nothing wrong. The problem is that Fedora is the only
distro not supporting KDE 3.5 until KDE 4 is ready for prime time.
And the solution, which has been repeatedly expressed here, is for
people using KDE in production environments to switch to a different
distro. End of story.
--Mike Bird
9:18 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Mike Bird <mgb-fedora <at> yosemite.net> writes:
KDE 4.0 was released on schedule in January.
KDE 4.0 was originally scheduled for October 23, 2007, and even that was only
after months of mostly unscheduled development, with suggested release dates as
early as Fall 2006.
KDE 4.1 is still on track for July.
Yes, but KDE 4.2 has no schedule decided at all. It could be released on a
6-month schedule, on a 9-month schedule or on something inbetween. So it's too
early to assume KDE 4.2 will be out in January.
Most Fedora and Ubuntu releases are on time. Which distro do you
use?
Fedora releases frequently slip by a couple of weeks.
Kevin Kofler
8:44 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
g wrote:
> Seems to me you ought to clarify your problem,
> eg what do you mean by "log out"?
seems to me, you should read what is written and if you do not understand,
then reread it.
I read it quite carefully.
You seem to use "shutdown" and "log out" interchangeably.
They are completely different operations.
> Isn't ctrl-alt-backspace meant to kill X, rather than
shutdown?
if it will not 'shutdown', then i kill it.
It's not surprising to me that you have problems.
> I'm pretty sure that if you said what machine you are using,
> and expressed your problem clearly, it would be solved very shortly.
what 'machine'? i am talking about a computer.
Sigh.
--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
8:29 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat June 21 2008 16:53:07 David Boles wrote:
Hey Mike. Have you ever seen software released when it was scheduled
to be
released? ;-) Not games (especially games), not drivers, not anything.
KDE 4.0 was released on schedule in January. KDE 4.1 is still on track
for July.
Except Linux distro releases. And those slip too.
Most Fedora and Ubuntu releases are on time. Which distro do you use?
I don't recall if you replied to my basic questions about this
situation.
Yes, I answered your questions.
Did you look first? Live-CD try first? Or just jump in? If you
skipped one,
or two, or both one and two, you should be kicking your own butt for your
'problems' and not Fedora's and the KDE team. IMO.
We installed F9 on test boxes. F9 is not deployable because of KDE 4.
We did not put F9 on any production boxes.
Please see the subject of this thread. The question is not whether
people were surprised by KDE 4. Everyone knows KDE 4 will take a
while before it's useful. Even Aaron is disappointed that critical
functionality missed not only 4.0 but also 4.1.
The question is whether Fedora would provide a migration path by
supporting KDE 3.5 in F10. And the answer was a resounding "this
is too difficult so go use another distro".
--Mike Bird
8:07 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 22:51 +0000, g wrote:
Craig White wrote:
> It was started again virtually from scratch (KDE-4)
from where do you find this information?
----
if you were running Fedora 9, you would know this because if it were
just migrating from QT-3 to QT-4, many of the applications would have
all just been ported over already. Instead, they have kept their QT-3
libs and previous form.
# rpm -qa|grep kdelibs
kdelibs-4.0.5-2.fc9.i386
kdelibs3-devel-3.5.9-15.fc9.i386
kdelibs-common-4.0.5-2.fc9.i386
kdelibs-devel-4.0.5-2.fc9.i386
kdelibs3-3.5.9-15.fc9.i386
Craig
7:54 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 20:28 -0400, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 23:24 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Craig White <craigwhite <at> azapple.com> writes:
> > People who do software development wouldn't care whether it's KDE 3.5
or
> > KDE 4
>
> Actually they'll want KDE 4. Who wants to develop against an obsolete API?
KDE developers, sure. There's other software in the world than
GUI-based desktop apps.
----
and it was this class that I was referring to.
people who develop software can maneuver around little things that are
missing or don't seem to work properly.
the issue of unleashing KDE-4 on less technically skilled, un-savvy
computer users is something that I'm still balking at but I'm not
complaining...just noting. I have no choice because I am dealing with a
bunch of users that save files to their desktop and drag them where they
want them and simply do not understand file-save dialog boxes and how to
move around in them.
Craig
7:28 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 23:24 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Craig White <craigwhite <at> azapple.com> writes:
> People who do software development wouldn't care whether it's KDE 3.5 or
> KDE 4
Actually they'll want KDE 4. Who wants to develop against an obsolete API?
KDE developers, sure. There's other software in the world than
GUI-based desktop apps.
Kevin Kofler
--
Matthew Saltzman
Clemson University Math Sciences
mjs AT clemson DOT edu
http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs
6:36 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Craig White <craigwhite <at> azapple.com> writes:
It was started again virtually from scratch (KDE-4)
That is one of those partial truths: yes, the main user-visible parts of the
desktop workspace were rewritten (Kicker and KDesktop replaced by Plasma), but
a lot of things have been ported: most of kdelibs, several applications such as
Konqueror, KWrite and many more. Other applications such as Dolphin and
Gwenview are new as parts of KDE itself (and do replace KDE 3 apps: Dolphin
replaces Konqueror as the default file manager and Konqueror's file management
support has been rewritten to use the DolphinPart, Gwenview completely replaces
Kuickshow), but have existed as separate KDE 3 applications before.
Kevin Kofler
6:53 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Mike Bird wrote:
On Sat June 21 2008 16:11:26 Kevin Kofler wrote:
When KDE 4.0 was released in January a consensus was reached that major
releases of KDE 4 should occur at six month intervals. Although there
has been some discussion of four month cycles, the consensus for six
month cycles still seems to be firm:
KDE release -in-> Fedora
4.0 Jan '08 F9 May '08
4.1 Jul '08 F10 Nov '08
4.2 Jan '09 F11 May '09
4.3 Jul '09 F12 Nov '09
Hey Mike. Have you ever seen software released when it was scheduled to be
released? ;-) Not games (especially games), not drivers, not anything.
Except Linux distro releases. And those slip too.
I am truly sorry that you are disappointed with KDE 4.0. Really. But there it
is. deal with it as it is and wait for improvements. Make suggestions, in the
correct places, and go on.
I don't recall if you replied to my basic questions about this situation.
Did you look first? Live-CD try first? Or just jump in? If you skipped one, or
two, or both one and two, you should be kicking your own butt for your
'problems' and not Fedora's and the KDE team. IMO.
--
David
6:38 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat June 21 2008 16:11:26 Kevin Kofler wrote:
Mike Bird <mgb-fedora <at> yosemite.net> writes:
> I'm expecting KDE 4.2 or KDE 4.3 to be suitable for prime time.
> They should arrive in Fedora in May 2009 and November 2009.
I can't promise anything at this time (also because upstream hasn't decided
on a schedule for 4.2 yet, at least not that I know of), but KDE 4.2 could
hit Fedora as soon as February 2009, as a Fedora 10 (maybe also Fedora 9)
update. All this is not decided yet (and again, it also depends on
upstream), but it is no way a sure thing that 4.2 will only hit in May.
When KDE 4.0 was released in January a consensus was reached that major
releases of KDE 4 should occur at six month intervals. Although there
has been some discussion of four month cycles, the consensus for six
month cycles still seems to be firm:
KDE release -in-> Fedora
4.0 Jan '08 F9 May '08
4.1 Jul '08 F10 Nov '08
4.2 Jan '09 F11 May '09
4.3 Jul '09 F12 Nov '09
--Mike Bird
6:37 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan
<pocallaghan(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Well the main idea behind PA is to eradicate that problem since it
will be a super set
And, as I said, I have no problems with Pulseaudio. Why? Well I have a desktop
with 'normal' hardware. I don't have anything fancy. And, for me Fedora works
'out of the box'. Actually I normally (currently) run rawhide and I only have
the 'development breakage', to be expected, from time to time.
I won't name, on the Fedora list, the other Linux distros that I have
installed and that run with no, or minor, problems. But there are nine of them.
So? Am I just lucky? Or do I just have compatible hardware? Or do I just not
try to do "strange things'? I can't say.
I mentioned before about a Linux problem and dumping a ZIP Drive to solve it.
That was with Mandrake 7.0. Circa 2000 or so.
--
David
6:29 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Kevin Kofler wrote:
Mike Bird <mgb-fedora <at> yosemite.net> writes:
> I'm expecting KDE 4.2 or KDE 4.3 to be suitable for prime time.
> They should arrive in Fedora in May 2009 and November 2009.
I can't promise anything at this time (also because upstream hasn't decided on
a schedule for 4.2 yet, at least not that I know of), but KDE 4.2 could hit
Fedora as soon as February 2009, as a Fedora 10 (maybe also Fedora 9) update.
All this is not decided yet (and again, it also depends on upstream), but it is
no way a sure thing that 4.2 will only hit in May.
Kevin,
Inhale - hold - exhale - pause - repeat. ;-)
You KDE people (team?) are doing a fine job.
--
David
6:28 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Timothy Murphy <gayleard <at> eircom.net> writes:
It seems to me quite difficult to run KDE-3 and KDE-4 on the same
machine.
How exactly do you do it?
Do you share the same /home partition between the two?
What the distributions shipping parallel-installable KDE 3 and 4 do is to use a
completely separate configuration directory for KDE 4, usually ~/.kde4. The
obvious problem with that is that KDE 4 won't pick up your existing KDE 3
settings, so it's inadequate for migrating to KDE 4. It also means KDE 4 users
will have to manually rename ~/.kde4 to ~/.kde when they upgrade to a later
version which finally defaults to KDE 4, otherwise they'll lose all their
settings. This really sucks as a user experience, and it is one of the reasons
I don't like that setup.
Kevin Kofler
6:11 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Mike Bird <mgb-fedora <at> yosemite.net> writes:
I'm expecting KDE 4.2 or KDE 4.3 to be suitable for prime time.
They should arrive in Fedora in May 2009 and November 2009.
I can't promise anything at this time (also because upstream hasn't decided on
a schedule for 4.2 yet, at least not that I know of), but KDE 4.2 could hit
Fedora as soon as February 2009, as a Fedora 10 (maybe also Fedora 9) update.
All this is not decided yet (and again, it also depends on upstream), but it is
no way a sure thing that 4.2 will only hit in May.
Kevin Kofler
5:51 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Timothy Murphy wrote:
> when ever i go to shut down kde, i play a guessing game with it.
should
> i bother with 'log out' or go ahead and press <ctrl+alt+bkspc>, which,
> by the way, fails almost as often as 'log out'.
Seems to me you ought to clarify your problem,
eg what do you mean by "log out"?
seems to me, you should read what is written and if you do not understand,
then reread it.
'shut down kde', 'log out', 'press <ctrl+alt+bkspc>', all in
same paragraph.
what? you think this relates to 'log off system'? not even.
Do you mean you type these words,
'type these words'? not either.
or do you press a button in the panel?
button in 'lock | log out' applet in desktop panel, yes.
desktop is set up for mouse button actions of left for 'application menu',
right for 'desktop menu' where at bottom of each is selection of 'log
out'.
does this clarify what is meant by 'log out'?
Isn't ctrl-alt-backspace meant to kill X, rather than shutdown?
if it will not 'shutdown', then i kill it.
(I could be wrong as I never use it.)
this i believe.
I'm pretty sure that if you said what machine you are using,
and expressed your problem clearly, it would be solved very shortly.
what 'machine'? i am talking about a computer.
as i said, maybe you should reread and it might become more clearly to you.
please excuse me for being satirical, but your questions just happened to
hit me in a wrong way.
no, i do not believe you meant to come across wrong, it just hit me that way.
--
tc,hago.
g
.
in a free world without fences, who needs gates.
5:40 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan
<pocallaghan(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 14:36 -0400, David Boles wrote:
> Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 02:40 +0930, Tim wrote:
> >
> > Totally agree with this. It's hard enough even figuring out what the
> > various mixer controls even control.
>
>
> It is a choice. If you, either of you, do not like it you should disable it.
> But I seriously doubt that Pulseaudio will 'just go away' because you
don't
> like it. ;-)
You misunderstand me. It's not that I dislike PA, I dislike *all* the
sound systems on Linux
Well the main idea behind PA is to eradicate that problem since it
will be a super set
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
4:51 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 14:36 -0400, David Boles wrote:
Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 02:40 +0930, Tim wrote:
>
> Totally agree with this. It's hard enough even figuring out what the
> various mixer controls even control.
It is a choice. If you, either of you, do not like it you should disable it.
But I seriously doubt that Pulseaudio will 'just go away' because you don't
like it. ;-)
You misunderstand me. It's not that I dislike PA, I dislike *all* the
sound systems on Linux because I don't understand them and have never
seen a clear explanation of how they all fit together and what they do.
It seems to me (and it isn't the first time I've made the point) that
there's a gaping hole where a unified model should be. Maybe I'm just
stupid but I seem to see a lot of different models with overlapping
functionality and no clear relation between them. And every time someone
comes up with a new architecture (like PA) we have N+1 systems where
previously we had N.
In fact the mixer issue isn't even related to PA since I use Kmix.
poc
2:31 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Rex Dieter wrote:
Konstantin Svist wrote:
> I have a question for you, as a maintainer: how much trouble would one
> run into if one wanted to build/maintain unofficial KDE 3 packages for F9?
>
trouble? none
It would be a significant amount of work, but if someone was interested and willing to do
something like that, more power to 'em.
Okay then, _how much_ work would someone need to put into this?
Would it need to be constantly maintained or would it mostly be a
one-time effort? In either case, how many man-hours would you estimate
it might take up?
~Konstantin
1:36 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 02:40 +0930, Tim wrote:
Totally agree with this. It's hard enough even figuring out what the
various mixer controls even control.
It is a choice. If you, either of you, do not like it you should disable it.
But I seriously doubt that Pulseaudio will 'just go away' because you don't
like it. ;-)
--
David
12:31 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 02:40 +0930, Tim wrote:
On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 09:35 -0400, David Boles wrote:
> Pulseaudio is supposed to allow you to set the volume level(s) of
> various applications/output devices so that they can be different.
> Music soft. Ta-Ta! loud. As well as others. What is not so functional
> is the applications that are not yet able to mix with pulseaudio.
To my mind, it goes about this the wrong way. A case in point: You're
listening to your music at a reasonable level, and some annunciator
fires off at full volume. Unfortunately, you can't do anything about
that, as they're so quick to finish that you couldn't get to a volume
control in time. And even if you did manage to reduce the volume while
a long sample played, the next time the annunciator fires off it'll be
at the default full volume, again.
The things that make sounds, should control their own volumes,
themselves. A volume control in your music player, not some external
controller, should control its playback level, and not affect anything
else. The system annunciators should have their own level in the
appropriate control panel for the sounds (where you set which sounds
will be heard, for which events, should also set the level). Other
applications should have their own volume levels. The only sensible
external control should be a master volume, one that you can crank up
and down to make everything loud or quiet, in proportion to your
listening environment, as well as be able to quickly mute everything
when the phone rings.
The whole idea of a "mixer panel" approach is alien to the average
person who's never used a collection of equipment hooked up to a mixer.
And it's made all the more worse by bad setups of the mixer (badly
labelled controls, most controls needing to be run at maximum, etc.).
About the only sensible place for using a mixer on the computer is for
making recordings.
Totally agree with this. It's hard enough even figuring out what the
various mixer controls even control.
poc
12:16 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 13:50 -0300, Marcelo Magno T. Sales wrote:
CTRL+ALT+BS kills X and the graphical login manager too, so it
re-reads the xorg.conf file (if you have altered it, this is needed),
reload video drivers (if you have updated it, this is needed) and
reload the xdm/gdm/kdm configuration, among other things that are not
done if you simply log out.
Quite some time ago how X was managed was changed so that when you
logged out, it did actually "restart". Has that changed again?
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.25.6-55.fc9.i686
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.
12:10 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 09:35 -0400, David Boles wrote:
Pulseaudio is supposed to allow you to set the volume level(s) of
various applications/output devices so that they can be different.
Music soft. Ta-Ta! loud. As well as others. What is not so functional
is the applications that are not yet able to mix with pulseaudio.
To my mind, it goes about this the wrong way. A case in point: You're
listening to your music at a reasonable level, and some annunciator
fires off at full volume. Unfortunately, you can't do anything about
that, as they're so quick to finish that you couldn't get to a volume
control in time. And even if you did manage to reduce the volume while
a long sample played, the next time the annunciator fires off it'll be
at the default full volume, again.
The things that make sounds, should control their own volumes,
themselves. A volume control in your music player, not some external
controller, should control its playback level, and not affect anything
else. The system annunciators should have their own level in the
appropriate control panel for the sounds (where you set which sounds
will be heard, for which events, should also set the level). Other
applications should have their own volume levels. The only sensible
external control should be a master volume, one that you can crank up
and down to make everything loud or quiet, in proportion to your
listening environment, as well as be able to quickly mute everything
when the phone rings.
The whole idea of a "mixer panel" approach is alien to the average
person who's never used a collection of equipment hooked up to a mixer.
And it's made all the more worse by bad setups of the mixer (badly
labelled controls, most controls needing to be run at maximum, etc.).
About the only sensible place for using a mixer on the computer is for
making recordings.
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.25.6-55.fc9.i686
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.
12:08 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 10:41 +0100, Anne Wilson wrote:
Arthur - you wrote "They'll wait till Fedora users and other
similar
early adopters have helped iron out the bugs. Kinda like Pulse Audio,
NetworkManager, etc". Yes, someone has to be an early adopter for
bugs to be ironed out.
By that logic, let's get rid of the testing repos, and foist all the
half baked programs onto all the users, so the bugs are ironed out
faster.
The end result of a badly working distro, is that it loses a mass
following, and becomes a niche system.
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.25.6-55.fc9.i686
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.
11:56 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 4:41 AM, Anne Wilson <cannewilson(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
On Saturday 21 June 2008 00:47:24 Mike Bird wrote:
> The other distros are supporting both KDE 3.5 and KDE 4.x for one to
> three years. This allows people to migrate once KDE 4.x meets their
> needs.
As I mentioned elsewhere, I have one system that has both 3.5 and 4.0 running.
Compromises are necessary for this, and it results in a system considerably
less stable than the Fedora version. IMO, Fedora's decision was the right
one. There was plenty of warning that it may not suit all, and staying with
F8 was always a choice.
F7 was also a choice... just saying.
Arthur - you wrote "They'll wait till Fedora users and other
similar early
adopters have helped iron out the bugs. Kinda like Pulse Audio,
NetworkManager, etc". Yes, someone has to be an early adopter for bugs to be
Yup, and I applaud Fedora for that. That is one of Fedora's benefits
to the linux community
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
11:50 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Em Sábado 21 Junho 2008, Patrick O'Callaghan escreveu:
On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 16:15 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> Isn't ctrl-alt-backspace meant to kill X, rather than shutdown?
> (I could be wrong as I never use it.)
Ctrl-Alt-Backspace kills the X server. It's not clear to me whether
there is any practical difference between doing that and hitting a
"log out" button. Presumably the latter could give the various apps
time to clean up, but I'm not sure if it actually does this.
Logging out closes only the desktop environment you were using and the
applications that were running in it. CTRL+ALT+BS kills X and the
graphical login manager too, so it re-reads the xorg.conf file (if you
have altered it, this is needed), reload video drivers (if you have
updated it, this is needed) and reload the xdm/gdm/kdm configuration,
among other things that are not done if you simply log out.
Also, of course and as you've said yourself, if you kill X then the
running applications do not have the chance to quit gracefully and save
their data.
[]'s
Marcelo
11:40 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 16:15 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Isn't ctrl-alt-backspace meant to kill X, rather than shutdown?
(I could be wrong as I never use it.)
Ctrl-Alt-Backspace kills the X server. It's not clear to me whether
there is any practical difference between doing that and hitting a "log
out" button. Presumably the latter could give the various apps time to
clean up, but I'm not sure if it actually does this.
poc
10:26 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
David Boles wrote:
Chill out guy. All you are hearing is the sour grapes. The
'happiest'
never post. Except for Anne.
Maybe happy pills should be circulated with Linux distributions ...
Seriously, I think Anne is too kind.
I am genuinely puzzled by the minor problems that came with KDE-4.
It is as though the KDE-4 team was completely independent of the KDE-3 crew,
and started again from scratch.
However, the problems in my view are or were minor,
and certainly not worth writing to the Pope about.
I'd just ask the KDE and Fedora developers to bear in mind
that simplicity is a virtue, and that a little time should be spent
examining if it is possible to simplify the distribution,
as eg Torvalds seems to me to do rather will with the kernel.
--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
10:08 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Mike Bird wrote:
The difference, Kevin, is that Kubuntu shipped KDE 4.x a month
before
Fedora and will support KDE 3.5 nine months after Fedora ends support.
Kubuntu is providing people with three times the transition period that
Fedora is offering. Debian will probably go even further.
I don't really understand this.
It seems to me quite difficult to run KDE-3 and KDE-4 on the same machine.
How exactly do you do it?
Do you share the same /home partition between the two?
Actually, I do this, but I have come to the conclusion that it was unwise.
--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
10:15 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
g wrote:
i am using f8 and from what i have been thru and still going thru,
i must say that f8 is not a whole lot better than what i am reading
that f9 is like.
...
when ever i go to shut down kde, i play a guessing game with it.
should
i bother with 'log out' or go ahead and press <ctrl+alt+bkspc>, which,
by the way, fails almost as often as 'log out'.
Seems to me you ought to clarify your problem,
eg what do you mean by "log out"?
Do you mean you type these words, or do you press a button in the panel?
Isn't ctrl-alt-backspace meant to kill X, rather than shutdown?
(I could be wrong as I never use it.)
I'm pretty sure that if you said what machine you are using,
and expressed your problem clearly, it would be solved very shortly.
--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
10:14 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 16:26 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:
David Boles wrote:
> Chill out guy. All you are hearing is the sour grapes. The 'happiest'
> never post. Except for Anne.
Maybe happy pills should be circulated with Linux distributions ...
Seriously, I think Anne is too kind.
I am genuinely puzzled by the minor problems that came with KDE-4.
It is as though the KDE-4 team was completely independent of the KDE-3 crew,
and started again from scratch.
However, the problems in my view are or were minor,
and certainly not worth writing to the Pope about.
I'd just ask the KDE and Fedora developers to bear in mind
that simplicity is a virtue, and that a little time should be spent
examining if it is possible to simplify the distribution,
as eg Torvalds seems to me to do rather will with the kernel.
----
It was started again virtually from scratch (KDE-4)
It's obvious that they have some pretty high ambitions for KDE that are
well beyond what is already known to work (KDE-3)
Craig
9:57 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Anne Wilson wrote:
LDAP does feel a bit daunting. I feel that it should be possible to
learn
and activate one bit of its potential at a time, but after reading a
couple of
web pages about it I gave up. Does the book you mention lead you in
reasonably slowly? I've rather a lot on my plate for the forseeable
future, so don't want to have to swallow huge amounts of medicine at once
My view of LDAP is slightly jaundiced.
I've come to the conclusion that it is a very bad way
of creating a system-wide address book,
but unfortunately the only way that actually works.
(As Winston Churchill said of democracy,
it is a terrible system but better than all the others
that have been tried from time to time.)
I have the Gerald Carter book (actually I borrowed it)
and I would give it 7/10, or alpha minus.
I was amazed when looking around how bad all the online introductions
on OpenLDAP that I found were.
(If I have to read another history of X509 I may jump out of the window.)
Certainly Carter's book is far better than any of these.
It still seems to me that there ought to be a simple 10-page exposition
on OpenLDAP, but if there is I haven't found it.
--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
9:35 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Timothy Murphy wrote:
David Boles wrote:
> Chill out guy. All you are hearing is the sour grapes. The 'happiest'
> never post. Except for Anne.
Maybe happy pills should be circulated with Linux distributions ...
Seriously, I think Anne is too kind.
I am genuinely puzzled by the minor problems that came with KDE-4.
It is as though the KDE-4 team was completely independent of the KDE-3 crew,
and started again from scratch.
However, the problems in my view are or were minor,
and certainly not worth writing to the Pope about.
I'd just ask the KDE and Fedora developers to bear in mind
that simplicity is a virtue, and that a little time should be spent
examining if it is possible to simplify the distribution,
as eg Torvalds seems to me to do rather will with the kernel.
Bear this in mind to then. KDE developers are doing the actual developing of
KDE 4.x and Fedora's KDE team is doing the packaging. KDE has been talking
about these major changes for a long time.
And I can only imagine the screaming and complaints if Fedora had *not*
provided KDE 4.0. ;-)
--
David
9:25 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Mike Bird wrote:
Please see the subject of this thread. Those of us who are
switching
are doing so because the answer to the question was negative. We didn't
randomly upgrade our production systems. We tested F9 and determined
that KDE 4.x is not ready for prime time.
I don't understand why you keep writing to us
to tell us you have left (or are about to leave?) Fedora.
I stopped running Kubuntu on one machine some time ago -
because I found it too complicated to run several distros -
but it never occurred to me to write to the Kubuntu mailing list
to tell them I was leaving ...
--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
9:21 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
They'll wait till Fedora users and other similar early adopters
have
helped iron out the bugs. Kinda like Pulse Audio, NetworkManager, etc
I fear that will be a very long wait ...
Actually, NM has been getting slowly but steadily better on my machines.
It would have been very foolish to have waited.
(But I still don't like NM's "works like magic" approach.)
Sound remains a complete mystery to me.
As far as I can make out, pulseaudio is one of several "developments"
that were intended to make the sound setup simpler,
but which in fact have added another layer of obfuscation
to an already confused mess.
Too many cooks spoil the broth?
--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
12:55 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Fri, 2008-06-20 at 21:50 -0400, David Boles wrote:
But you do know that you new distro will switch to KDE 4.0 soon too
right?
Going by the various reports and comments, those other distros will
switch over when KDE 4 is ready for use. The biggest bitch about this,
Fedora-wise, would seem to be that Fedora did it too soon. And, I think
people are worried that it still won't be ready by the time Fedora stops
supporting a prior release that was still using KDE 3.
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.25.6-55.fc9.i686
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.
7:35 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Saturday 21 June 2008 13:23:59 Craig White wrote:
As Timothy Murphy will tell you, I am pretty adamant that the
Internet
provides too many confusing LDAP walk-throughs that don't correlate with
each other and will typically lead to frustration and the most simple
way to learn LDAP is Gerald Carter's book titled 'LDAP System
Administration'.
I don't know how many family 'users' you are dealing with but if it's
more than 5, it may be worthwhile to learn LDAP. These are the things I
am doing with LDAP these days...
Account management - Posix and Samba users/passwords all integrated and
the same - when I create a user, the user can login to either Linux,
mail server, Windows with the same password and it's the same user .
Group memberships - for access control or for mail distribution lists.
Autofs mounts - typically for NFS mounts because I use 'login scripts'
for samba (Windows) mounts.
E-mail aliases - postfix checks LDAP to see if it's a valid address
before accepting and cyrus-imapd figures out which account(s) mail is
delivered to.
Samba - the passdb
Address Books (Shared and Personal) - Shared address books that are
available to everyone include the 'accounts' address book which is
created automatically when I add users, one or more general shared
address book(s), and each user gets their own LDAP address book so they
can move from program to program, computer to computer and yet still
have access to their address book.
In terms of accounts, there are not so many. My husband and I, regularly, and
my daughter occasionally (on XP), when she needs something on my network.
She has a samba login. In terms of hardware, though, it's a bit different.
There is my IMAP/file server (CentOS), David's Mandriva desktop box, my F9
desktop box, my EeePC, and this laptop with Mandriva and, very occasionally,
XP. That's without the occasional guests - other daughter, granddaughter,
etc..
LDAP does feel a bit daunting. I feel that it should be possible to learn and
activate one bit of its potential at a time, but after reading a couple of
web pages about it I gave up. Does the book you mention lead you in
reasonably slowly? I've rather a lot on my plate for the forseeable future,
so don't want to have to swallow huge amounts of medicine at once :-)
Anne
8:44 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Timothy Murphy wrote:
Mike Bird wrote:
> Please see the subject of this thread. Those of us who are switching
> are doing so because the answer to the question was negative. We didn't
> randomly upgrade our production systems. We tested F9 and determined
> that KDE 4.x is not ready for prime time.
I don't understand why you keep writing to us
to tell us you have left (or are about to leave?) Fedora.
I stopped running Kubuntu on one machine some time ago -
because I found it too complicated to run several distros -
but it never occurred to me to write to the Kubuntu mailing list
to tell them I was leaving ...
I wondered if anyone else was thinking this too. ;-)
--
David
8:35 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Timothy Murphy wrote:
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> They'll wait till Fedora users and other similar early adopters have
> helped iron out the bugs. Kinda like Pulse Audio, NetworkManager, etc
I fear that will be a very long wait ...
Actually, NM has been getting slowly but steadily better on my machines.
It would have been very foolish to have waited.
(But I still don't like NM's "works like magic" approach.)
Sound remains a complete mystery to me.
As far as I can make out, pulseaudio is one of several "developments"
that were intended to make the sound setup simpler,
but which in fact have added another layer of obfuscation
to an already confused mess.
Too many cooks spoil the broth?
Pulseaudio is supposed to allow you to set the volume level(s) of various
applications/output devices so that they can be different. Music soft. Ta-Ta!
loud. As well as others. What is not so functional is the applications that
are not yet able to mix with pulseaudio.
I can;t speak about NM. I don't need or use it. I know some that do use it and
they do not have problems. I read of problems here though. Which, to me,
sounds like hardware support problems.
--
David
7:23 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 13:04 +0100, Anne Wilson wrote:
On Saturday 21 June 2008 12:58:11 Craig White wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 12:34 +0100, Anne Wilson wrote:
> > On Saturday 21 June 2008 12:16:20 Craig White wrote:
> > > > My first reaction to finding that I didn't have desktop icons for
my
> > > > nfs shares was a feeling of loss, yet I can open those shares in
> > > > either dolphin or konqueror, so it's really no more than a minor
> > > > inconvenience. The same goes for most of the other things that are
> > > > 'missing'. Work-arounds exist, while work goes on to fix the
> > > > situation.
> > >
> > > ----
> > > FWIW...I found that this behavior stopped when I went to autofs
> > > mounting anyway so it's no loss.
> >
> > ?? A change to fstab, I presume? Example of current line is
> >
> > 192.168.0.40:/home /mnt/servername_home nfs nosuid,exec,rw,bg,soft,intr 0
> > 0
> >
> > Do you mean change 'nfs' to 'autofs'?
>
> ----
> I don't use fstab to do nfs mounts anymore...that's so yesterday ;-)
>
Hey, after years of doing smb mounts I've only just learned how to do nfs
mounts :-)
----
autofs does ease some of the ugly aspects of hard nfs mounts
----
> but the answer is no...there are no nfs mounts in fstab needed when you
> use autofs
>
> http://tldp.org/HOWTO/Automount.html
>
> this is a good general explanation...
> http://tldp.org/linuxfocus/English/January2001/article141.shtml
>
OK - More reading to do.
----
those are short, general info explanations
----
> There are a lot of benefits to doing it this way...they are soft mounts
> and not hard mounts. I can change the mounts simply by changing LDAP and
> not having to change each computer (LDAP is not necessary for autofs but
> is certainly a big plus).
>
LDAP is another whole new ball game. I keep thinking that I should read up on
that, too, as is certainly would be helpful.
Thanks for the links, Craig.
----
As Timothy Murphy will tell you, I am pretty adamant that the Internet
provides too many confusing LDAP walk-throughs that don't correlate with
each other and will typically lead to frustration and the most simple
way to learn LDAP is Gerald Carter's book titled 'LDAP System
Administration'.
I don't know how many family 'users' you are dealing with but if it's
more than 5, it may be worthwhile to learn LDAP. These are the things I
am doing with LDAP these days...
Account management - Posix and Samba users/passwords all integrated and
the same - when I create a user, the user can login to either Linux,
mail server, Windows with the same password and it's the same user .
Group memberships - for access control or for mail distribution lists.
Autofs mounts - typically for NFS mounts because I use 'login scripts'
for samba (Windows) mounts.
E-mail aliases - postfix checks LDAP to see if it's a valid address
before accepting and cyrus-imapd figures out which account(s) mail is
delivered to.
Samba - the passdb
Address Books (Shared and Personal) - Shared address books that are
available to everyone include the 'accounts' address book which is
created automatically when I add users, one or more general shared
address book(s), and each user gets their own LDAP address book so they
can move from program to program, computer to computer and yet still
have access to their address book.
Craig
7:04 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Saturday 21 June 2008 12:58:11 Craig White wrote:
On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 12:34 +0100, Anne Wilson wrote:
> On Saturday 21 June 2008 12:16:20 Craig White wrote:
> > > My first reaction to finding that I didn't have desktop icons for my
> > > nfs shares was a feeling of loss, yet I can open those shares in
> > > either dolphin or konqueror, so it's really no more than a minor
> > > inconvenience. The same goes for most of the other things that are
> > > 'missing'. Work-arounds exist, while work goes on to fix the
> > > situation.
> >
> > ----
> > FWIW...I found that this behavior stopped when I went to autofs
> > mounting anyway so it's no loss.
>
> ?? A change to fstab, I presume? Example of current line is
>
> 192.168.0.40:/home /mnt/servername_home nfs nosuid,exec,rw,bg,soft,intr 0
> 0
>
> Do you mean change 'nfs' to 'autofs'?
----
I don't use fstab to do nfs mounts anymore...that's so yesterday ;-)
Hey, after years of doing smb mounts I've only just learned how to do nfs
mounts :-)
but the answer is no...there are no nfs mounts in fstab needed when
you
use autofs
http://tldp.org/HOWTO/Automount.html
this is a good general explanation...
http://tldp.org/linuxfocus/English/January2001/article141.shtml
OK - More reading to do.
There are a lot of benefits to doing it this way...they are soft
mounts
and not hard mounts. I can change the mounts simply by changing LDAP and
not having to change each computer (LDAP is not necessary for autofs but
is certainly a big plus).
LDAP is another whole new ball game. I keep thinking that I should read up on
that, too, as is certainly would be helpful.
Thanks for the links, Craig.
Anne
6:58 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 12:34 +0100, Anne Wilson wrote:
On Saturday 21 June 2008 12:16:20 Craig White wrote:
> > My first reaction to finding that I didn't have desktop icons for my nfs
> > shares was a feeling of loss, yet I can open those shares in either
> > dolphin or konqueror, so it's really no more than a minor inconvenience.
> > The same goes for most of the other things that are 'missing'.
> > Work-arounds exist, while work goes on to fix the situation.
>
> ----
> FWIW...I found that this behavior stopped when I went to autofs mounting
> anyway so it's no loss.
?? A change to fstab, I presume? Example of current line is
192.168.0.40:/home /mnt/servername_home nfs nosuid,exec,rw,bg,soft,intr 0 0
Do you mean change 'nfs' to 'autofs'?
----
I don't use fstab to do nfs mounts anymore...that's so yesterday ;-)
but the answer is no...there are no nfs mounts in fstab needed when you
use autofs
http://tldp.org/HOWTO/Automount.html
this is a good general explanation...
http://tldp.org/linuxfocus/English/January2001/article141.shtml
There are a lot of benefits to doing it this way...they are soft mounts
and not hard mounts. I can change the mounts simply by changing LDAP and
not having to change each computer (LDAP is not necessary for autofs but
is certainly a big plus).
Craig
6:34 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Saturday 21 June 2008 12:16:20 Craig White wrote:
> My first reaction to finding that I didn't have desktop
icons for my nfs
> shares was a feeling of loss, yet I can open those shares in either
> dolphin or konqueror, so it's really no more than a minor inconvenience.
> The same goes for most of the other things that are 'missing'.
> Work-arounds exist, while work goes on to fix the situation.
----
FWIW...I found that this behavior stopped when I went to autofs mounting
anyway so it's no loss.
?? A change to fstab, I presume? Example of current line is
192.168.0.40:/home /mnt/servername_home nfs nosuid,exec,rw,bg,soft,intr 0 0
Do you mean change 'nfs' to 'autofs'?
Anne
6:16 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 10:48 +0100, Anne Wilson wrote:
On Friday 20 June 2008 23:53:47 Marcelo Magno T. Sales wrote:
> I saw no one stating nothing like that. The blame some people have put
> on Fedora was for shipping an incomplete KDE4 when there was the option
> to ship the fully functional KDE 3.5.9. These people said that Fedora
> should have waited for KDE4 to become more stable/functional before
> opting to include it in Fedora.
> That's all, and even that is arguable.
Most of the really bad things about KDE4 were fixed about a week after release
of F9. I consider that pretty good. OK, the desktop can't, at present, be
used in just the same way as we have done before, but everything is
available, so is it really such a big deal? We have been told that even that
is fixed in 4.1, which is only a few weeks away.
My first reaction to finding that I didn't have desktop icons for my nfs
shares was a feeling of loss, yet I can open those shares in either dolphin
or konqueror, so it's really no more than a minor inconvenience. The same
goes for most of the other things that are 'missing'. Work-arounds exist,
while work goes on to fix the situation.
----
FWIW...I found that this behavior stopped when I went to autofs mounting
anyway so it's no loss.
Craig
4:48 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Friday 20 June 2008 23:53:47 Marcelo Magno T. Sales wrote:
I saw no one stating nothing like that. The blame some people have
put
on Fedora was for shipping an incomplete KDE4 when there was the option
to ship the fully functional KDE 3.5.9. These people said that Fedora
should have waited for KDE4 to become more stable/functional before
opting to include it in Fedora.
That's all, and even that is arguable.
Most of the really bad things about KDE4 were fixed about a week after release
of F9. I consider that pretty good. OK, the desktop can't, at present, be
used in just the same way as we have done before, but everything is
available, so is it really such a big deal? We have been told that even that
is fixed in 4.1, which is only a few weeks away.
My first reaction to finding that I didn't have desktop icons for my nfs
shares was a feeling of loss, yet I can open those shares in either dolphin
or konqueror, so it's really no more than a minor inconvenience. The same
goes for most of the other things that are 'missing'. Work-arounds exist,
while work goes on to fix the situation.
Anne
4:41 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Saturday 21 June 2008 00:47:24 Mike Bird wrote:
The other distros are supporting both KDE 3.5 and KDE 4.x for one to
three years. This allows people to migrate once KDE 4.x meets their
needs.
As I mentioned elsewhere, I have one system that has both 3.5 and 4.0 running.
Compromises are necessary for this, and it results in a system considerably
less stable than the Fedora version. IMO, Fedora's decision was the right
one. There was plenty of warning that it may not suit all, and staying with
F8 was always a choice.
Arthur - you wrote "They'll wait till Fedora users and other similar early
adopters have helped iron out the bugs. Kinda like Pulse Audio,
NetworkManager, etc". Yes, someone has to be an early adopter for bugs to be
ironed out.
Anne
Anne
2:18 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Craig White wrote:
<snip>
I have a lot of machines running Fedora 8 / KDE and none experience
the
issue you are talking about. I suspect there is a problem with your
installation because that is not an issue with Fedora 8/KDE.
not an issue for you, yet in a couple of past post, i do believe there were
comments to similar problems with f8.
in 1 box, i have 2 installs of f8 and only difference is with minimal install
in that kde locks up and even wedges when it goes to 'crt power down'.
many times i have had to use power switch to reboot as reset switch will not
work. with fuller install, it is only on an occasion that system will lock up
and need a reset switch reboot and seldom i have to power switch it off.
both are troublesome when it comes to 'log out'. minimal install will not
'log out' from time to time and <ctrl+alt+bkspc> will not even work and
requires a 'kill' from a vterm. a few times i have not been able to switch
to a vterm and had reset or power down.
with 2 other boxes with f8, kde will occasionally lock up and wedge with
reset or power switch to restart. but no where near like it is on this one.
on all 3 i have reinstalled several times to clear problem, but to no avail.
hardware problem? maybe. but i do not think so because fc6, f8 live installed,
f8 fel live installed, mandriva 2k8, knoppix 5, have worked with out problems.
a bad dvd burn? not likely as checksum shows burn to be good.
As for the notion of you get what you pay for...this is essentially a
<snip>
likely to spend much time on a problem that is in F-8 but not in F-9.
i do wish to participate and will when i get to f9. i see no need to
bother developers with 'old problems'. they have enough to do with
getting f9 working better.
my intent is to have a friend with cable internet to burn me a respin
of f8 and install it with hopes of getting a better installation. and
yes, i have been updating. i do not have all installed as yet, as i am
wading thru updates to what i have on system instead of just letting all
updates be made.
i did not intend to drag this out as far as i have as other post was just
to make a comment. and as stated in another post, this thread is kde 3.5
in f10.
--
tc,hago.
g
.
in a free world without fences, who needs gates.
10:57 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 7:35 PM, Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net> wrote:
[ snip ]
The difference, Kevin, is that Kubuntu shipped KDE 4.x a month
before
Fedora and will support KDE 3.5 nine months after Fedora ends support.
Kubuntu is providing people with three times the transition period that
Fedora is offering. Debian will probably go even further.
To you that may not seem much different. To people who rely on F/LOSS
for office work and software development, that's a major difference.
Seriously? So you think those guys didn't know that? You think they
wouldn't have liked to do so? It simply was not feasible.
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
9:44 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Mike Bird wrote:
On Fri June 20 2008 18:50:45 David Boles wrote:
> But you do know that you new distro will switch to KDE 4.0 soon too right?
Your definition of "soon" must be different than mine:
Fedora will support KDE 3.5 until approximately December 2008.
Kubuntu will support KDE 3.5 until approximately October 2009.
Debian will support KDE 3.5 until maybe 2011 or 2012.
I'm expecting KDE 4.2 or KDE 4.3 to be suitable for prime time.
They should arrive in Fedora in May 2009 and November 2009.
That leaves Fedora without support for a prime time KDE for
several months. There's no such gap with Debian or Kubuntu.
Other distros are also shipping KDE 3.5 alongside KDE 4.x but
I haven't analyzed their timetables.
Hmm.. I do not use KDE. I'm a GNOME user. So this is really off target for me.
By all means do as you wish. Switch or bitch for KDE. But I have seen, on
other Fedora lists, all of the efforts being made by the KDE team for 'your' KDE.
Helping works much, much better than bitching with community projects. Anyone
can bitch. Those that truly care help.
Again it is your choice. As I said... I don't use KDE. But I have seen a lot
of work by the KDE group. Helping them will do a lot more good than all of
these 'me too' complaints.
--
David
9:32 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Fri June 20 2008 18:50:45 David Boles wrote:
But you do know that you new distro will switch to KDE 4.0 soon too
right?
Your definition of "soon" must be different than mine:
Fedora will support KDE 3.5 until approximately December 2008.
Kubuntu will support KDE 3.5 until approximately October 2009.
Debian will support KDE 3.5 until maybe 2011 or 2012.
I'm expecting KDE 4.2 or KDE 4.3 to be suitable for prime time.
They should arrive in Fedora in May 2009 and November 2009.
That leaves Fedora without support for a prime time KDE for
several months. There's no such gap with Debian or Kubuntu.
Other distros are also shipping KDE 3.5 alongside KDE 4.x but
I haven't analyzed their timetables.
--Mike Bird
9:21 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
--- On Fri, 6/20/08, Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net> wrote:
From: Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net>
Subject: Re: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
To: fedora-list(a)redhat.com
Date: Friday, June 20, 2008, 4:49 PM
On Fri June 20 2008 16:33:27 David Boles wrote:
> This thread has become a whiners contest. Who can
whine the longest or the
> loudest. Or both.
We surrender David. You win.
--Mike Bird
--
Don't surrender yet :). Let's go into Overtime. The scored is tied 0 to 0, the
other team scores and are up with about a 1 minute left, then your goalkeeper puts the
ball inside the enemy box, and Semih Senturk scores. You are tied again. Never, Never
Give UP.
We go to Penalty Kicks. KDE Team wins 3 to 1.
Awesome game in the Euro Cup 2008.
http://www.irishexaminer.com/breaking/sport/mhgbgbidmhql/
I wish that my team could be like the Turkey national soccer team, in the eyes of defeat
they come back and find a way to win. KDE Team be like the Turkey soccer team !!!
Sweden vs Russia Tommorrow
Spain vs Italy Sunday
Wish everyone the best!
Regards,
Antonio
8:51 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Mike Bird wrote:
On Fri June 20 2008 16:33:27 David Boles wrote:
> This thread has become a whiners contest. Who can whine the longest or the
> loudest. Or both.
We surrender David. You win.
Hi Mike. I was not looking for that. ;-)
Linux is choice. You chose what to use, or not to use. You also get to keep
the pieces when it breaks.
I don't know you age. There was a BBS program named OPUS back before The
Internet. A community project. It worked really well but it took a lot of
work, by hand no GUI stuff, to get it to work.
Their disclaimer was something like 'If you break it you get to keep the
pieces'. I feel the same way about Linux. Learn what you are doing and know
before you start. Or? "'If you break it you get to keep the pieces'"
;-)
Seriously. Look first. It works better that way.
Have a good night.
--
David
8:50 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Mike Bird wrote:
On Fri June 20 2008 15:09:10 David Boles wrote:
> Ok. How many of those of you that are disappointed or upset with KDE 4.x
> did any research *before* you installed/upgraded? How many of you
> downloaded a KDE Live-CD and actually tried it *before* you
> installed/upgraded?
Please see the subject of this thread. Those of us who are switching
are doing so because the answer to the question was negative. We didn't
randomly upgrade our production systems. We tested F9 and determined
that KDE 4.x is not ready for prime time.
On Fri June 20 2008 15:32:54 David Boles wrote:
> As for switching distros? You don't really believe that the other distros
> won't go to KDE 4.x.x too do you? ;-)
The other distros are supporting both KDE 3.5 and KDE 4.x for one to
three years. This allows people to migrate once KDE 4.x meets their
needs. FWIW it looks like we'll probably standardize on Debian Lenny,
although Kubuntu Hardy is still a possibility.
Then by all means you should certainly switch. Linux is choice.
But you do know that you new distro will switch to KDE 4.0 soon too right?
--
David
8:48 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Kevin Kofler wrote:
Paul Johnson <pauljohn32 <at> gmail.com> writes:
> He is speaking for me. I was a RedHat / Fedora user 10 years, 1 month
> ago, I became an Ubuntu user.
FYI, Kubuntu is dropping KDE 3 support in Intrepid Ibex, which will be released
at about the same time as Fedora 10.
https://wiki.kubuntu.org/KubuntuIntrepidVersion
Their setup will be almost exactly as it is now in Fedora 9 (and will be in
Fedora 10 too): no more KDE 3 desktop and core KDE 3 modules, only KDE 3
libraries and the KDE 3 versions of (mostly third-party) applications not yet
ported to KDE 4.
So the distro you're switching to isn't really doing much different from the
one you're escaping from, the only difference is that they're doing things one
release later, with the intermediary solution of parallel-installable KDE 3 and
4 in Hardy Heron, which we skipped because it would have been a lot of work for
something which would probably have been thrown out one or two releases later
(in Kubuntu, that solution is only lasting for a single release!).
Hey Kevin! ;-)
Take a breath. You, and all the KDE team, did IMO a great job. Which I am sure
will go on and things will all be flowers soon.
Chill out guy. All you are hearing is the sour grapes. The 'happiest' never
post. Except for Anne.
--
David
7:43 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Fri, 2008-06-20 at 17:35 -0700, Mike Bird wrote:
On Fri June 20 2008 17:16:12 Kevin Kofler wrote:
> FYI, Kubuntu is dropping KDE 3 support in Intrepid Ibex, which will be
> released at about the same time as Fedora 10.
> https://wiki.kubuntu.org/KubuntuIntrepidVersion
> Their setup will be almost exactly as it is now in Fedora 9 (and will be in
> Fedora 10 too): no more KDE 3 desktop and core KDE 3 modules, only KDE 3
> libraries and the KDE 3 versions of (mostly third-party) applications not
> yet ported to KDE 4.
>
> So the distro you're switching to isn't really doing much different from
> the one you're escaping from, the only difference is that they're doing
> things one release later, with the intermediary solution of
> parallel-installable KDE 3 and 4 in Hardy Heron, which we skipped because
> it would have been a lot of work for something which would probably have
> been thrown out one or two releases later (in Kubuntu, that solution is
> only lasting for a single release!).
The difference, Kevin, is that Kubuntu shipped KDE 4.x a month before
Fedora and will support KDE 3.5 nine months after Fedora ends support.
Kubuntu is providing people with three times the transition period that
Fedora is offering. Debian will probably go even further.
To you that may not seem much different. To people who rely on F/LOSS
for office work and software development, that's a major difference.
----
you sort of made your point a long time ago and now you're just flogging
him.
People who do software development wouldn't care whether it's KDE 3.5 or
KDE 4
The only usability issue that remains with KDE-4 is for low knowledge
users.
Craig
7:35 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Fri June 20 2008 17:16:12 Kevin Kofler wrote:
FYI, Kubuntu is dropping KDE 3 support in Intrepid Ibex, which will
be
released at about the same time as Fedora 10.
https://wiki.kubuntu.org/KubuntuIntrepidVersion
Their setup will be almost exactly as it is now in Fedora 9 (and will be in
Fedora 10 too): no more KDE 3 desktop and core KDE 3 modules, only KDE 3
libraries and the KDE 3 versions of (mostly third-party) applications not
yet ported to KDE 4.
So the distro you're switching to isn't really doing much different from
the one you're escaping from, the only difference is that they're doing
things one release later, with the intermediary solution of
parallel-installable KDE 3 and 4 in Hardy Heron, which we skipped because
it would have been a lot of work for something which would probably have
been thrown out one or two releases later (in Kubuntu, that solution is
only lasting for a single release!).
The difference, Kevin, is that Kubuntu shipped KDE 4.x a month before
Fedora and will support KDE 3.5 nine months after Fedora ends support.
Kubuntu is providing people with three times the transition period that
Fedora is offering. Debian will probably go even further.
To you that may not seem much different. To people who rely on F/LOSS
for office work and software development, that's a major difference.
--Mike Bird
7:16 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Paul Johnson <pauljohn32 <at> gmail.com> writes:
He is speaking for me. I was a RedHat / Fedora user 10 years, 1
month
ago, I became an Ubuntu user.
FYI, Kubuntu is dropping KDE 3 support in Intrepid Ibex, which will be released
at about the same time as Fedora 10.
https://wiki.kubuntu.org/KubuntuIntrepidVersion
Their setup will be almost exactly as it is now in Fedora 9 (and will be in
Fedora 10 too): no more KDE 3 desktop and core KDE 3 modules, only KDE 3
libraries and the KDE 3 versions of (mostly third-party) applications not yet
ported to KDE 4.
So the distro you're switching to isn't really doing much different from the
one you're escaping from, the only difference is that they're doing things one
release later, with the intermediary solution of parallel-installable KDE 3 and
4 in Hardy Heron, which we skipped because it would have been a lot of work for
something which would probably have been thrown out one or two releases later
(in Kubuntu, that solution is only lasting for a single release!).
Kevin Kofler
7:10 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Craig White wrote:
<snip>
Those on Fedora who use KDE and want everything to be perfect should
probably still be on Fedora 8 though I really have few complaints with
i am using f8 and from what i have been thru and still going thru,
i must say that f8 is not a whole lot better than what i am reading
that f9 is like.
both seem to be proof of 'you get what you pay for'. this is not to
knock fedora, 'betas' need to be tested some where.
when ever i go to shut down kde, i play a guessing game with it. should
i bother with 'log out' or go ahead and press <ctrl+alt+bkspc>, which,
by the way, fails almost as often as 'log out'.
i do believe that it would be better to delay a release when so many
bugs are present. if a lot of bugs are known and left for later update,
i believe that it would be better to at least have a 'bug list' included.
then we, as 'testers' would at least know what to watch out for.
granted, developers will never know where all bugs are, but at least it
would be nice to know about 'known bugs' when they release. in fact, if
i had a 'known bugs list' i just might enjoy being a guinea pig. :o)
By the way...I've never experienced a Fedora (i386, x86_64 or
ppc)
installation that didn't work...so yeah, I actually expect it to work
and it has always met that expectation.
installations usually do work and are not that difficult, except when it
comes to hardware conflicts. after all, what is so hard about installing
software to a hard drive compared to getting software to work?
--
tc,hago.
g
.
in a free world without fences, who needs gates.
6:47 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Fri June 20 2008 15:09:10 David Boles wrote:
Ok. How many of those of you that are disappointed or upset with KDE
4.x
did any research *before* you installed/upgraded? How many of you
downloaded a KDE Live-CD and actually tried it *before* you
installed/upgraded?
Please see the subject of this thread. Those of us who are switching
are doing so because the answer to the question was negative. We didn't
randomly upgrade our production systems. We tested F9 and determined
that KDE 4.x is not ready for prime time.
On Fri June 20 2008 15:32:54 David Boles wrote:
As for switching distros? You don't really believe that the other
distros
won't go to KDE 4.x.x too do you? ;-)
The other distros are supporting both KDE 3.5 and KDE 4.x for one to
three years. This allows people to migrate once KDE 4.x meets their
needs. FWIW it looks like we'll probably standardize on Debian Lenny,
although Kubuntu Hardy is still a possibility.
--Mike Bird
6:33 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Marcelo Magno T. Sales wrote:
Em Sexta 20 Junho 2008, David Boles escreveu:
> Anne Wilson wrote:
>> On Friday 20 June 2008 21:09:57 Craig White wrote:
>>> My experience is that each Linux
>>> distribution has its own strengths and weaknesses and that all
>>> Linux users benefit from having options.
>> Precisely. I use CentOS where I need total stability, Mandriva
>> where I want ease for technophobics and Fedora on the rest. Where
>> else do you get choice like this?
> Anne, and all KDE users. Do any of you really, and I mean really,
> believe that Fedora is responsible for the KDE 'problems'? That the
> KDE problems are not KDE's problems? That Fedora released in their
> ISO's a KDE that was made intentionally to 'break' KDE in Fedora?
I saw no one stating nothing like that. The blame some people have put
on Fedora was for shipping an incomplete KDE4 when there was the option
to ship the fully functional KDE 3.5.9. These people said that Fedora
should have waited for KDE4 to become more stable/functional before
opting to include it in Fedora.
That's all, and even that is arguable.
Agreed that Fedora could have shipped the deprecated KDE 3.5.x. But those KDE
users that *made an effort* to look and, and try, KDE 4.x *first*, and did not
like it, should have said - I stop here for now with Fedora 8 because I don't
like it or it is not 100%. I will wait.
No one *forced* you, or anyone else, to upgrade/install Fedora 9 with KDE 4.x.
No one held a gun to your head. No one said that they would eat your baby. The
choice was yours. And you took it.
If you think KDE 4.x is broken on your machine or in your mind then you win
the pieces. You broke your install by installing Fedora 9 with KDE 4.x. Which
was your choice. Not mine. Not Fedora's. Your's.
Many others are adjusting to KDE 4.x and some are even saying that they like
it. Anne is a very active KDE user and she tells me that things are improving
all of the time.
BTW. Next time you blame someone for giving you something for free give it a
double, or triple thought before you do. These people work very hard to *give
you, for free*, what you are complaining about here. If you had *paid* for it
I might accept your points. If you had made the effort to look before you
leaped I might accept your points. As for now? I do not.
This thread has become a whiners contest. Who can whine the longest or the
loudest. Or both.
--
David
6:16 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
2008/6/20 David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com>:
[ snip ]
> As for switching distros? You don't really believe that the other distros
> won't go to KDE 4.x.x too do you? ;-)
They'll wait till Fedora users and other similar early adopters have
helped iron out the bugs. Kinda like Pulse Audio, NetworkManager, etc
I can think of several other distros that have KDE 4.x available. Pulse Audio
too. I can not speak about any problems with NetworkManager. I do not need or
use it so I do not have any experience with it.
--
David
5:53 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Em Sexta 20 Junho 2008, David Boles escreveu:
Anne Wilson wrote:
> On Friday 20 June 2008 21:09:57 Craig White wrote:
>> My experience is that each Linux
>> distribution has its own strengths and weaknesses and that all
>> Linux users benefit from having options.
>
> Precisely. I use CentOS where I need total stability, Mandriva
> where I want ease for technophobics and Fedora on the rest. Where
> else do you get choice like this?
Anne, and all KDE users. Do any of you really, and I mean really,
believe that Fedora is responsible for the KDE 'problems'? That the
KDE problems are not KDE's problems? That Fedora released in their
ISO's a KDE that was made intentionally to 'break' KDE in Fedora?
I saw no one stating nothing like that. The blame some people have put
on Fedora was for shipping an incomplete KDE4 when there was the option
to ship the fully functional KDE 3.5.9. These people said that Fedora
should have waited for KDE4 to become more stable/functional before
opting to include it in Fedora.
That's all, and even that is arguable.
[]'s
Marcelo
5:38 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
2008/6/20 David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com>:
[ snip ]
As for switching distros? You don't really believe that the other
distros
won't go to KDE 4.x.x too do you? ;-)
They'll wait till Fedora users and other similar early adopters have
helped iron out the bugs. Kinda like Pulse Audio, NetworkManager, etc
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
5:36 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 5:22 PM, Craig White <craigwhite(a)azapple.com> wrote:
On Fri, 2008-06-20 at 18:09 -0400, David Boles wrote:
> Anne Wilson wrote:
> > On Friday 20 June 2008 21:09:57 Craig White wrote:
> >> My experience is that each Linux
> >> distribution has its own strengths and weaknesses and that all Linux
> >> users benefit from having options.
> >
> > Precisely. I use CentOS where I need total stability, Mandriva where I want
> > ease for technophobics and Fedora on the rest. Where else do you get choice
> > like this?
>
>
> Anne, and all KDE users. Do any of you really, and I mean really, believe that
> Fedora is responsible for the KDE 'problems'? That the KDE problems are not
> KDE's problems? That Fedora released in their ISO's a KDE that was made
> intentionally to 'break' KDE in Fedora?
>
> I know that you don't Anne ;-) This is mostly addressed at the other users
> posting in these several threads.
>
> Ok. How many of those of you that are disappointed or upset with KDE 4.x did
> any research *before* you installed/upgraded? How many of you downloaded a KDE
> Live-CD and actually tried it *before* you installed/upgraded?
>
> If you did not look or try it first you have very little to really complain
> about here. Would you buy a car, a house, rent an apartment, buy a suit, buy a
> pair of shoes without first looking at them or trying them out/on? Try before
> you buy.
Please don't get into this concept of blaming users because the
packages
made the decision to go to KDE-4
I think users need to be responsible for their decisions.
and we all have to deal with it. It's
not a big thing but it's enough to cause me to delay rolling out
Fedora-9
Seems like a good reason. You Furthermore, you took the time to see
what's up before rolling out.
to a network of KDE users for now because of their expectations
and level of skills has them putting files on the Desktop which is
presently dead space on KDE.
Soon to be fixed last I read. Seems for the better. You could have a
smb share on your desktop now. You may like this.
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
5:24 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Fri, 2008-06-20 at 18:09 -0400, David Boles wrote:
> Anne Wilson wrote:
>> On Friday 20 June 2008 21:09:57 Craig White wrote:
>>> My experience is that each Linux
>>> distribution has its own strengths and weaknesses and that all Linux
>>> users benefit from having options.
>> Precisely. I use CentOS where I need total stability, Mandriva where I want
>> ease for technophobics and Fedora on the rest. Where else do you get choice
>> like this?
>
> Anne, and all KDE users. Do any of you really, and I mean really, believe that
> Fedora is responsible for the KDE 'problems'? That the KDE problems are not
> KDE's problems? That Fedora released in their ISO's a KDE that was made
> intentionally to 'break' KDE in Fedora?
>
> I know that you don't Anne ;-) This is mostly addressed at the other users
> posting in these several threads.
>
> Ok. How many of those of you that are disappointed or upset with KDE 4.x did
> any research *before* you installed/upgraded? How many of you downloaded a KDE
> Live-CD and actually tried it *before* you installed/upgraded?
I did that so I knew what I was getting into and I don't regret it for a
moment.
Linux *needs* more users such as you sir. I tip my hat to you.
So many, too many, times I see this 'same' thread, with a different subject,
repeated over and over.
I use GNOME myself. And that too breaks from time to time. Especially in Rawhide.
--
David
5:22 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Fri, 2008-06-20 at 18:09 -0400, David Boles wrote:
Anne Wilson wrote:
> On Friday 20 June 2008 21:09:57 Craig White wrote:
>> My experience is that each Linux
>> distribution has its own strengths and weaknesses and that all Linux
>> users benefit from having options.
>
> Precisely. I use CentOS where I need total stability, Mandriva where I want
> ease for technophobics and Fedora on the rest. Where else do you get choice
> like this?
Anne, and all KDE users. Do any of you really, and I mean really, believe that
Fedora is responsible for the KDE 'problems'? That the KDE problems are not
KDE's problems? That Fedora released in their ISO's a KDE that was made
intentionally to 'break' KDE in Fedora?
I know that you don't Anne ;-) This is mostly addressed at the other users
posting in these several threads.
Ok. How many of those of you that are disappointed or upset with KDE 4.x did
any research *before* you installed/upgraded? How many of you downloaded a KDE
Live-CD and actually tried it *before* you installed/upgraded?
If you did not look or try it first you have very little to really complain
about here. Would you buy a car, a house, rent an apartment, buy a suit, buy a
pair of shoes without first looking at them or trying them out/on? Try before
you buy.
----
this is entirely counter-productive...those who maintain the packages
made the decision to go to KDE-4 and those of use who want to use KDE on
Fedora, will either stay on Fedora 8 or live with KDE-4 on Fedora 9.
KDE is committed to KDE-4 and Fedora-KDE packagers are going with the
flow. There is no future in KDE-3.5.x, only the past.
Things have improved since the original release and the Live-CD probably
doesn't approximate the current experience. It's suitable for my usage.
Please don't get into this concept of blaming users because the packages
made the decision to go to KDE-4 and we all have to deal with it. It's
not a big thing but it's enough to cause me to delay rolling out
Fedora-9 to a network of KDE users for now because of their expectations
and level of skills has them putting files on the Desktop which is
presently dead space on KDE.
Craig
5:21 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 5:16 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan
<pocallaghan(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 2008-06-20 at 18:09 -0400, David Boles wrote:
> Anne Wilson wrote:
> > On Friday 20 June 2008 21:09:57 Craig White wrote:
> >> My experience is that each Linux
> >> distribution has its own strengths and weaknesses and that all Linux
> >> users benefit from having options.
> >
> > Precisely. I use CentOS where I need total stability, Mandriva where I want
> > ease for technophobics and Fedora on the rest. Where else do you get choice
> > like this?
>
>
> Anne, and all KDE users. Do any of you really, and I mean really, believe that
> Fedora is responsible for the KDE 'problems'? That the KDE problems are not
> KDE's problems? That Fedora released in their ISO's a KDE that was made
> intentionally to 'break' KDE in Fedora?
>
> I know that you don't Anne ;-) This is mostly addressed at the other users
> posting in these several threads.
>
> Ok. How many of those of you that are disappointed or upset with KDE 4.x did
> any research *before* you installed/upgraded? How many of you downloaded a KDE
> Live-CD and actually tried it *before* you installed/upgraded?
I did that so I knew what I was getting into and I don't regret it for a
moment.
poc
While I personally feel that the expectations of stability, or lack
there of, were communicated to the public by the KDE team, especially
considering all the discussions went on in public.
However, may we could benefit from even more transparency through
possibly centralized info on KDE. I have some non-Fedora projects I
need to wrap up, but I will see what I can contribute towards clearer
info on KDE in Fedora, because frankly, I would rather not switch to
Ubuntu, or Suse.
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
5:16 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Fri, 2008-06-20 at 18:09 -0400, David Boles wrote:
Anne Wilson wrote:
> On Friday 20 June 2008 21:09:57 Craig White wrote:
>> My experience is that each Linux
>> distribution has its own strengths and weaknesses and that all Linux
>> users benefit from having options.
>
> Precisely. I use CentOS where I need total stability, Mandriva where I want
> ease for technophobics and Fedora on the rest. Where else do you get choice
> like this?
Anne, and all KDE users. Do any of you really, and I mean really, believe that
Fedora is responsible for the KDE 'problems'? That the KDE problems are not
KDE's problems? That Fedora released in their ISO's a KDE that was made
intentionally to 'break' KDE in Fedora?
I know that you don't Anne ;-) This is mostly addressed at the other users
posting in these several threads.
Ok. How many of those of you that are disappointed or upset with KDE 4.x did
any research *before* you installed/upgraded? How many of you downloaded a KDE
Live-CD and actually tried it *before* you installed/upgraded?
I did that so I knew what I was getting into and I don't regret it for a
moment.
poc
5:09 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Anne Wilson wrote:
On Friday 20 June 2008 21:09:57 Craig White wrote:
> My experience is that each Linux
> distribution has its own strengths and weaknesses and that all Linux
> users benefit from having options.
Precisely. I use CentOS where I need total stability, Mandriva where I want
ease for technophobics and Fedora on the rest. Where else do you get choice
like this?
Anne, and all KDE users. Do any of you really, and I mean really, believe that
Fedora is responsible for the KDE 'problems'? That the KDE problems are not
KDE's problems? That Fedora released in their ISO's a KDE that was made
intentionally to 'break' KDE in Fedora?
I know that you don't Anne ;-) This is mostly addressed at the other users
posting in these several threads.
Ok. How many of those of you that are disappointed or upset with KDE 4.x did
any research *before* you installed/upgraded? How many of you downloaded a KDE
Live-CD and actually tried it *before* you installed/upgraded?
If you did not look or try it first you have very little to really complain
about here. Would you buy a car, a house, rent an apartment, buy a suit, buy a
pair of shoes without first looking at them or trying them out/on? Try before
you buy.
--
David
4:52 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Anne Wilson wrote:
Yes, definitely an over-statement, for which I apologise. All the
same,
if we insist on using a bleeding edge distro it is to be expected that
things will
break from time to time. The truth is that it works most of the time, and
if we can't live with the rest, then maybe Fedora is not the best distro
to use. It really is a matter of choice.
Nod, much better. Many thanks Anne.
-- Rex
4:25 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 3:53 PM, Anne Wilson <cannewilson(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
On Friday 20 June 2008 21:09:57 Craig White wrote:
> My experience is that each Linux
> distribution has its own strengths and weaknesses and that all Linux
> users benefit from having options.
Precisely. I use CentOS where I need total stability, Mandriva where I want
ease for technophobics and Fedora on the rest. Where else do you get choice
like this?
Anne
Since no one asked me... Centos5 on my home server, F7 on my
desktop... soon to be F(max possible).
I had the opportunity, I would purchase an RHEL license. All my needs
are met for now however.
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
3:53 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Friday 20 June 2008 21:09:57 Craig White wrote:
My experience is that each Linux
distribution has its own strengths and weaknesses and that all Linux
users benefit from having options.
Precisely. I use CentOS where I need total stability, Mandriva where I want
ease for technophobics and Fedora on the rest. Where else do you get choice
like this?
Anne
3:50 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Friday 20 June 2008 20:53:12 Rex Dieter wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
> Being a beta tester for RedHat is OK as a way of life
Well, to be closer to the truth s/RedHat/KDE/
> It never came clear to me until I read Ann Wilson's post in this
> thread: "We should always remember that Fedora
> does not set out to be the stable desktop required in most production
> situations. You use it at your peril, The fact that it actually
> works in most situations is a bonus."
That statement was a bit unfortunate, esp on differing expections around
what defines a 'stable desktop' and .production situations'. But, the
statement taken at face value "the fact that it actually works in most
situations is a bonus" isn't accurate imo. Users can and should expect
Fedora to "just work".
At that poijnt, we can all bikeshed about what "just work" means. :)
Yes, definitely an over-statement, for which I apologise. All the same, if we
insist on using a bleeding edge distro it is to be expected that things will
break from time to time. The truth is that it works most of the time, and if
we can't live with the rest, then maybe Fedora is not the best distro to use.
It really is a matter of choice.
Anne
3:09 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Fri, 2008-06-20 at 14:29 -0500, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 9:49 AM, Timothy Murphy
<gayleard(a)eircom.net> wrote:
> Mike Bird wrote:
>
>> My loyalty is to keeping my systems secure and my users productive.
>> It's hard to believe that Red Hat would ship KDE 4.1 in F10, but if
>> it does KDE users will just choose another distro and install it.
>
> Speak for yourself.
> I doubt if you speak for anyone else.
> You certainly don't speak for this KDE user.
>
> --
He is speaking for me. I was a RedHat / Fedora user 10 years, 1 month
ago, I became an Ubuntu user.
Being a beta tester for RedHat is OK as a way of life, but the other
companies for which I test stuff give me free samples :)
It never came clear to me until I read Ann Wilson's post in this
thread: "We should always remember that Fedora
does not set out to be the stable desktop required in most production
situations. You use it at your peril, The fact that it actually
works in most situations is a bonus."
It never really struck me that way: if you use Fedora, you don't have
a reason to expect that your PC will actually work. Well, I do need
it to start up sometimes so I can read this group.
----
I wouldn't recommend using Anne's comments as a barometer for your
decision but rather your own expectations.
It is true that Fedora, since it's inception, chooses to be a leading
edge of development and yes, there is some stability that is sacrificed
for that goal. There are a number of 'stable' versions of Linux
including RHEL/RHWS/CentOS/Scientific Linux all based off RHEL or the
various Debian variations including Ubuntu/Kubuntu and SuSE, Mandriva
and so on. It never hurts to be familiar with all of the various Linux
distributions and evaluate whether one of the others meets your
expectations more than Fedora. My experience is that each Linux
distribution has its own strengths and weaknesses and that all Linux
users benefit from having options.
Generally, the notion of release early/often - even if all the features
are fully implemented is a philosophy that has served Linux and all the
packages on Linux well. In fact, it's clear that Microsoft and Apple
release their new versions of their OS with many known bugs so I see a
parallel there. When new versions of packages are incorporated, it
hopefully garners a lot of attention, useful bug reporting by users and
things are fixed over time. I actually appreciate being part of the
process and have learned that software perfection never really exists.
The best you ever get is that it performs to your expectations and I
guess I always want more.
Those on Fedora who use KDE and want everything to be perfect should
probably still be on Fedora 8 though I really have few complaints with
KDE and Fedora 9 these days...it does however suffer from feature
regression. I appreciate that this is just a temporary condition and
that many are working on rectifying these shortcomings.
By the way...I've never experienced a Fedora (i386, x86_64 or ppc)
installation that didn't work...so yeah, I actually expect it to work
and it has always met that expectation.
Craig
2:47 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Konstantin Svist wrote:
> It would be a significant amount of work, but if someone was
interested
> and willing to do something like that, more power to 'em.
Okay then, _how much_ work would someone need to put into this?
Would it need to be constantly maintained or would it mostly be a
one-time effort? In either case, how many man-hours would you estimate
it might take up?
Time commitment would likely be proportional to your expections of quality and continuing
support. To do well, and if *I* were doing it, my estimations would be at least ~6 hours
up front, including pkg builds, hosting, deployment, plus who know how much extra
time/effort for onging support and bugfixes.
-- Rex
2:53 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Paul Johnson wrote:
Being a beta tester for RedHat is OK as a way of life
Well, to be closer to the truth s/RedHat/KDE/
It never came clear to me until I read Ann Wilson's post in this
thread: "We should always remember that Fedora
does not set out to be the stable desktop required in most production
situations. You use it at your peril, The fact that it actually
works in most situations is a bonus."
That statement was a bit unfortunate, esp on differing expections around what defines a
'stable desktop' and .production situations'. But, the statement taken at
face value "the fact that it actually works in most situations is a bonus"
isn't accurate imo. Users can and should expect Fedora to "just work".
At that poijnt, we can all bikeshed about what "just work" means. :)
-- Rex
2:41 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 2:29 PM, Paul Johnson <pauljohn32(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 9:49 AM, Timothy Murphy
<gayleard(a)eircom.net> wrote:
> Mike Bird wrote:
>
>> My loyalty is to keeping my systems secure and my users productive.
>> It's hard to believe that Red Hat would ship KDE 4.1 in F10, but if
>> it does KDE users will just choose another distro and install it.
>
> Speak for yourself.
> I doubt if you speak for anyone else.
> You certainly don't speak for this KDE user.
>
> --
He is speaking for me. I was a RedHat / Fedora user 10 years, 1 month
ago, I became an Ubuntu user.
Being a beta tester for RedHat is OK as a way of life, but the other
companies for which I test stuff give me free samples :)
Oh wait, please don't tell me you believe the part about "Red Hat
would ship KDE 4.1 in F10"?
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
2:40 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 2:29 PM, Paul Johnson <pauljohn32(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 9:49 AM, Timothy Murphy
<gayleard(a)eircom.net> wrote:
> Mike Bird wrote:
>
>> My loyalty is to keeping my systems secure and my users productive.
>> It's hard to believe that Red Hat would ship KDE 4.1 in F10, but if
>> it does KDE users will just choose another distro and install it.
>
> Speak for yourself.
> I doubt if you speak for anyone else.
> You certainly don't speak for this KDE user.
>
> --
He is speaking for me. I was a RedHat / Fedora user 10 years, 1 month
ago, I became an Ubuntu user.
That's cool, but surely you didn't do it for more KDE?
Being a beta tester for RedHat is OK as a way of life, but the other
companies for which I test stuff give me free samples :)
I guess if you repeat this "beta tester for RedHat" you will
eventually believe it.
It never came clear to me until I read Ann Wilson's post in this
thread: "We should always remember that Fedora
does not set out to be the stable desktop required in most production
situations. You use it at your peril, The fact that it actually
works in most situations is a bonus."
This isn't some deep secret
It never really struck me that way: if you use Fedora, you don't
have
a reason to expect that your PC will actually work. Well, I do need
it to start up sometimes so I can read this group.
That's an exaggeration. You have an expectation that your PC will
work, you just don't have an expectation of having stable software all
the time.
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
2:29 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 9:49 AM, Timothy Murphy <gayleard(a)eircom.net> wrote:
Mike Bird wrote:
> My loyalty is to keeping my systems secure and my users productive.
> It's hard to believe that Red Hat would ship KDE 4.1 in F10, but if
> it does KDE users will just choose another distro and install it.
Speak for yourself.
I doubt if you speak for anyone else.
You certainly don't speak for this KDE user.
--
He is speaking for me. I was a RedHat / Fedora user 10 years, 1 month
ago, I became an Ubuntu user.
Being a beta tester for RedHat is OK as a way of life, but the other
companies for which I test stuff give me free samples :)
It never came clear to me until I read Ann Wilson's post in this
thread: "We should always remember that Fedora
does not set out to be the stable desktop required in most production
situations. You use it at your peril, The fact that it actually
works in most situations is a bonus."
It never really struck me that way: if you use Fedora, you don't have
a reason to expect that your PC will actually work. Well, I do need
it to start up sometimes so I can read this group.
pj
--
Paul E. Johnson
Professor, Political Science
1541 Lilac Lane, Room 504
University of Kansas
11:26 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Kevin Kofler wrote:
Craig White <craigwhite <at> azapple.com> writes:
> Kevin Kofler stated it clearly...the 3 Fedora developers made the
> decision without any input from RedHat at all.
>
Actually we're 5: 4 packagers (Than Ngo, Rex Dieter, Lukáš Tinkl and me) and
one Live CD maintainer (Sebastian Vahl) who also maintains/comaintains some
packages. And there are many other participants in the KDE SIG who did some
work too, for example Pavel Shevchuk (Stalwart) who did the Fedora Waves
KSplash and KDM themes.
Kevin Kofler
I have a question for you, as a maintainer: how much trouble would one
run into if one wanted to build/maintain unofficial KDE 3 packages for F9?
Let's assume that this hypothetical package would not be compatible with
KDE4 (that is, both couldn't be installed at the same time).. since this
has already been mentioned as a deal-breaker.
I'm asking because I'm not in the least familiar with package
maintenance procedures.
Thanks!
9:54 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun, 2008-06-15 at 00:30 -0400, Ric Moore wrote:
On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 14:58 -0700, Mike Bird wrote:
> On Sat June 14 2008 14:21:29 Antonio Olivares wrote:
> > stay here and write many, many bug reports, rally the troops in hopes of
> > making KDE 4.X the best KDE that is possible, take the positives the good
> > things and try to turn your face to bad things, the things you do not like
> > about KDE. In all the bad, there has to be something good. Okular is very
> > good. Evince is also. I can use either or to view multiple document
> > formats, ie., dvi, pdf, ps, etc. . Let the battle to which desktop in
> > Fedora 9 or higher begin, which one earns your respect and choice after
> > all, you can make other statements that can make more impact.
>
> There is reason to hope that in a couple of years KDE 4.x will be better
> than KDE 3.5, but for now KDE 4.x is unproductive for most users.
>
> Distros that don't provide KDE 3.5 for their KDE users while KDE 4.x is
> being developed will simply lose most of their KDE users. That is not a
> good thing for Fedora and that is not a good thing for Red Hat. And there
> are things I'd rather be doing than migrating a bunch of installations to
> some other distro.
Installing CentOS tomorrow. I've got almost 1,500 members and
participating organizations in KDE's PIM Kaddressbook for our
Non-Profit. Can't do without it. I understand that it isn't in KDE4 as
of yet. No support for KDE3 so I gotta dance with who brung me.
My own two cents is that it might have been better if KDE3 been left in
by default and introduce KDE4 into testing. That approach could've kept
people, like myself, putting up with all the other blowups. Fedora, You
all have just gone past the point of audience participation for me. This
is a damn sad day, but it's been one heckuva ride.
----
Ric,
Please don't get sucked into being misinformed.
Kaddressbook is in Fedora 9 and it is still the same old 3.5.9 version
that has been around and it hasn't been updated to KDE-4 yet. The entire
suite of KDE-PIM applications are still 3.5.x
The issues of KDE-4 are the ones that we have been talking about - user
space and the Desktop and they are mostly marginal and Fedora 9/KDE-4
are indeed usable.
Nothing wrong at all with CentOS-5 or RHEL-5. I"m just saying if you are
driving your decision based on whether you can use Kaddressbook on
Fedora 9, then there's no reason to go to CentOS
Craig
6:47 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> One thing that slightly surprises me is that having a server
> that runs 5 times as fast, with 4 times as much memory,
> as my greatly-loved ancient Asus server
> does not in fact seem to speed anything up noticeably.
I am guessing your network is your current bottleneck
Isn't it everybody's?
I'm only using this machine as a server - httpd, mysql,
openldap, etc.
I guess the slowest machine in the world is going to be faster
than my reasonably fast (4Mb/s) ADSL connection.
5:56 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 6:47 PM, Timothy Murphy <gayleard(a)eircom.net> wrote:
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>> One thing that slightly surprises me is that having a server
>> that runs 5 times as fast, with 4 times as much memory,
>> as my greatly-loved ancient Asus server
>> does not in fact seem to speed anything up noticeably.
>
> I am guessing your network is your current bottleneck
Isn't it everybody's?
I'm only using this machine as a server - httpd, mysql,
openldap, etc.
I guess the slowest machine in the world is going to be faster
than my reasonably fast (4Mb/s) ADSL connection.
Exactly. If you're not going to be hitting Mysql with heavy queries, a
1GHz Celeron sans xorg would probably server you just as well.
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
2:25 p.m.
Mike Bird wrote:
QUESTION TO DEVELOPERS: Is there any hope of a full KDE 3.5
in F10, plus an upgrade path from F8 to F10 that preserves
KDE 3.5 configurations?
Fedora 9+ is pretty much comitted to kde 4 now, so short answer is no.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE/KDE4FAQ
The way forward is to help make kde4 better. and/or stick with f8/kde3 or rhel5/kde3 (if
you want something beyond f8's lifetime).
-- Rex
9:49 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Mike Bird wrote:
My loyalty is to keeping my systems secure and my users productive.
It's hard to believe that Red Hat would ship KDE 4.1 in F10, but if
it does KDE users will just choose another distro and install it.
Speak for yourself.
I doubt if you speak for anyone else.
You certainly don't speak for this KDE user.
--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
3:12 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Mon, 2008-06-16 at 12:17 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 4:07 AM, Andrew Kelly
<akelly(a)corisweb.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 15:03 -0600, linuxguy wrote:
>> On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 09:38 -0700, Mike Bird wrote:
>> > QUESTION TO DEVELOPERS: Is there any hope of a full KDE 3.5
>> > in F10, plus an upgrade path from F8 to F10 that preserves
>> > KDE 3.5 configurations?
>> >
>> > KDE 4.0 is incomplete and not suitable for most users.
>>
>>
>> I totally agree ! I was going to post about this but I didn't want to
>> upset the group. But its true ! F9 is the WORST RH/Fedora release I
>> have ever used and I've been doing this since RH8.
>>
>> I want KDE 3.5 back for F10.
>>
>> And don't give me the crap that Fedora is bleeding edge software. F9
>> is beyond bleeding, its suicidal.
>>
>
> F10 will be out before you know it, and F8 still gets dozens of updates
> a week. I still can't get that to sit well with me. Are things being
> accelerated to the point of there being 5 Fedora releases for each RHEL
> release? Or is EL re-tooling for annual releases, maybe?
>
> Andy
Has anything change? Doesn't Fedora still follow it's original 6 month
release cycle?
Yeah, guess you're right, Arthur. Sure feels quicker to me lately,
though. Don't know why.
Mebbe it's just my brain slowing down.
When is RHEL 6 supposed to release?
Andy
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
9:31 p.m.
On Mon, 2008-06-16 at 12:35 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
RedHat did NOT push KDE 4.x down anyones throat. KDE* in Fedora is
purely a community effort, that means you and I.
Playing devil's advocate: If that were true, then the community could
have said, "no," and it wouldn't have happened. Somehow, I just don't
think that's likely.
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.25.6-55.fc9.i686
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.
11:12 p.m.
Tim wrote:
On Mon, 2008-06-16 at 12:35 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> RedHat did NOT push KDE 4.x down anyones throat. KDE* in Fedora is
> purely a community effort, that means you and I.
Playing devil's advocate: If that were true, then the community could
have said, "no," and it wouldn't have happened.
If the majority of the KDE SIG (*) felt that way, you're darn rootin tootin that's
exactly what would have happened.
(1) where a majority were not affiliated with Red Hat.
-- Rex
10:13 p.m.
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 9:31 PM, Tim <ignored_mailbox(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote:
On Mon, 2008-06-16 at 12:35 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> RedHat did NOT push KDE 4.x down anyones throat. KDE* in Fedora is
> purely a community effort, that means you and I.
Playing devil's advocate: If that were true, then the community could
have said, "no," and it wouldn't have happened. Somehow, I just don't
think that's likely.
Which community? Maybe the community members who are doing the work?
Do you have a shred of evidence that RedHat has any involvement in KDE
in Fedora? Have you been to any KDE SIG meetings? Are you on the
kde-redhat mailing list? Or are purely making assumptions, possibly
based on your biases?
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
6:53 p.m.
Mike Bird wrote:
On Mon June 16 2008 12:28:05 Rex Dieter wrote:
> Be careful who you blame here. At akademy 2007, I specifically asked
> kde's upstream developers if parallel installability with kde3 would be
> possible or supported... and for an answer, received an emphatic no.
Most major distros seem to providing KDE 3.5 as an alternative to
KDE 4.x. There's no need for both to be installed at the same
time on the same system (which would be hard).
Look closer, I'll be pleasantly surprised if those "most major distros"
didn't do it as I described (allowing for parallel-installability). I listened in on
some of their ml/irc discussions, but perhaps they chose to implement it differently since
then. *shrug*.
-- Rex
4:50 p.m.
On Monday 16 June 2008 18:35:27 Arthur Pemberton wrote:
The decision to go with KDE4 was made by the few doing the work. I
believe one of the major reasons for _not_ sticking with 3.5 currently
is that is a large technical challenge and there are few resources to
cover the work.
As a matter of interest, I have one box with Fedora on and two laptops with
Mandriva. Mandriva decided to go for including both 3.5 and 4.0. I was
afraid that some serious compromises might be necessary to do that, and I
think it has been so. Certainly the Mandriva versions of KDE are nothing
like as solid and reliable as the Fedora one. I'm seeing some very weird
things.
Anne
Anne
2:28 p.m.
Mike Bird wrote:
So with most major distros we get to choose to migrate to KDE 4.x
when
it's usable for our clients rather than Red Hat pushing KDE 4.x down
our throats before it's cooked.
Be careful who you blame here. At akademy 2007, I specifically asked kde's upstream
developers if parallel installability with kde3 would be possible or supported... and for
an answer, received an emphatic no.
This is part why we say that in our FAQ:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE/KDE4FAQ
Other distros choose to disregard upstream intentions here, and hack around it, unwisely,
imo.
-- Rex
12:35 p.m.
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 12:19 PM, Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net> wrote:
So with most major distros we get to choose to migrate to KDE 4.x
when
it's usable for our clients rather than Red Hat pushing KDE 4.x down
our throats before it's cooked. Migration will be an annoyance but
software freedom is wonderful.
I don't know what RedHat has done to you, or why you insist on playing
the role of the victim. You could have been a bit more involved, and
see first hand, but I will try to convey my observations to you as
clearly as possible.
RedHat did NOT push KDE 4.x down anyones throat. KDE* in Fedora is
purely a community effort, that means you and I.
The decision to go with KDE4 was made by the few doing the work. I
believe one of the major reasons for _not_ sticking with 3.5 currently
is that is a large technical challenge and there are few resources to
cover the work.
There were meetings, mailing list discussions and announcements before
KDE 4.x even came out. Did you give input? Did you help out?
Why are people so quick to just blame RedHat? The only thing RedHat
_might_ be guilty of is not taking control of the KDE development, and
I don't see that as necessarily a bad thing.
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
12:19 p.m.
On Mon June 16 2008 08:16:05 Kevin Kofler wrote:
Mike Bird <mgb-fedora <at> yosemite.net> writes:
> Kubuntu shipped KDE 3.5 in Hardy which will be supported until October
> 2009.
Careful there, KDE is explicitly excluded from LTS in Hardy (but the EOL
date you quote is probably correct, the regular support time is 1.5 years).
Their rationale: KDE 3 is too old for LTS, KDE 4 is too new. And they're
planning to move to KDE 4 only in Intrepid (i.e. Hardy+1, about the time
F10 releases).
Hardy already includes a "Kubuntu 8.04 KDE 4 Remix" spin for early adopters,
while the original Kubuntu Hardy spin provides KDE 3.5 with support out to
October 2009.
> Debian will ship KDE 3.5 in Lenny. That means at least three
years of
> Debian support for KDE 3.5.
That's pretty much the ONLY option if you want to keep 3.5 that long, and
be aware that Debian does NOT fix any bugs in stable, with the exception of
security bugs and sometimes some big showstoppers (but even that isn't
guaranteed, only security fixes are). Basically, you get things as they are
at the moment of the Lenny release, with only security fixes.
There are also upgrades and bug fixes via Backports and point releases.
There could be a problem with newer hardware if kernels aren't backported
promptly. Other than that, the reduced churn is a plus.
So with most major distros we get to choose to migrate to KDE 4.x when
it's usable for our clients rather than Red Hat pushing KDE 4.x down
our throats before it's cooked. Migration will be an annoyance but
software freedom is wonderful.
--Mike Bird
12:17 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 4:07 AM, Andrew Kelly <akelly(a)corisweb.org> wrote:
On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 15:03 -0600, linuxguy wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 09:38 -0700, Mike Bird wrote:
> > QUESTION TO DEVELOPERS: Is there any hope of a full KDE 3.5
> > in F10, plus an upgrade path from F8 to F10 that preserves
> > KDE 3.5 configurations?
> >
> > KDE 4.0 is incomplete and not suitable for most users.
>
>
> I totally agree ! I was going to post about this but I didn't want to
> upset the group. But its true ! F9 is the WORST RH/Fedora release I
> have ever used and I've been doing this since RH8.
>
> I want KDE 3.5 back for F10.
>
> And don't give me the crap that Fedora is bleeding edge software. F9
> is beyond bleeding, its suicidal.
>
F10 will be out before you know it, and F8 still gets dozens of updates
a week. I still can't get that to sit well with me. Are things being
accelerated to the point of there being 5 Fedora releases for each RHEL
release? Or is EL re-tooling for annual releases, maybe?
Andy
Has anything change? Doesn't Fedora still follow it's original 6 month
release cycle?
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
10:16 a.m.
Mike Bird <mgb-fedora <at> yosemite.net> writes:
Kubuntu shipped KDE 3.5 in Hardy which will be supported until
October
2009.
Careful there, KDE is explicitly excluded from LTS in Hardy (but the EOL date
you quote is probably correct, the regular support time is 1.5 years). Their
rationale: KDE 3 is too old for LTS, KDE 4 is too new. And they're planning to
move to KDE 4 only in Intrepid (i.e. Hardy+1, about the time F10 releases).
Debian will ship KDE 3.5 in Lenny. That means at least three years
of
Debian support for KDE 3.5.
That's pretty much the ONLY option if you want to keep 3.5 that long, and be
aware that Debian does NOT fix any bugs in stable, with the exception of
security bugs and sometimes some big showstoppers (but even that isn't
guaranteed, only security fixes are). Basically, you get things as they are at
the moment of the Lenny release, with only security fixes.
Kevin Kofler
9:41 a.m.
New subject: NetworkManager does not recognize wireless
I noticed that after performing the first Fedora 9 update as suggested
by the OS, my NetworkManager does not connect to my wireless anymore.
Does anyone have the same problem? Any suggestion?
Thanks in advance
5:55 a.m.
Bill Davidsen wrote:
Mike Bird wrote:
> QUESTION TO DEVELOPERS: Is there any hope of a full KDE 3.5
> in F10, plus an upgrade path from F8 to F10 that preserves
> KDE 3.5 configurations?
>
At this point let me say that KDE is dead, now and forever. The old
3.5 is no longer maintained, and as you note below, the 4.x branch is
more compatible at the acronym level than the user experience or
application compatibility level.
Just as a matter of interest, when will KDE officially EOL 3.5.x with
regard to security fixes?
4:07 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 15:03 -0600, linuxguy wrote:
On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 09:38 -0700, Mike Bird wrote:
> QUESTION TO DEVELOPERS: Is there any hope of a full KDE 3.5
> in F10, plus an upgrade path from F8 to F10 that preserves
> KDE 3.5 configurations?
>
> KDE 4.0 is incomplete and not suitable for most users.
I totally agree ! I was going to post about this but I didn't want to
upset the group. But its true ! F9 is the WORST RH/Fedora release I
have ever used and I've been doing this since RH8.
I want KDE 3.5 back for F10.
And don't give me the crap that Fedora is bleeding edge software. F9
is beyond bleeding, its suicidal.
F10 will be out before you know it, and F8 still gets dozens of updates
a week. I still can't get that to sit well with me. Are things being
accelerated to the point of there being 5 Fedora releases for each RHEL
release? Or is EL re-tooling for annual releases, maybe?
Andy
4 a.m.
On Sun June 15 2008 18:01:26 Bill Davidsen wrote:
Mike Bird wrote:
> QUESTION TO DEVELOPERS: Is there any hope of a full KDE 3.5
> in F10, plus an upgrade path from F8 to F10 that preserves
> KDE 3.5 configurations?
At this point let me say that KDE is dead, now and forever. The old 3.5
is no longer maintained, and as you note below, the 4.x branch is more
compatible at the acronym level than the user experience or application
compatibility level.
In a year or two KDE 4.x should be as productive for users as KDE 3.5 is
now. In the meantime I doubt that KDE 3.5 will see many new features but
it is certainly supportable. In fact, Fedora seems to be the only major
distro that won't support KDE 3.5 until KDE 4.x is ready for prime time.
Kubuntu shipped KDE 3.5 in Hardy which will be supported until October
2009. They're also shipping KDE 4.x for early adopters.
Debian will ship KDE 3.5 in Lenny. That means at least three years of
Debian support for KDE 3.5. They will also have KDE 4.x available so
their users can switch when KDE 4.x stabilizes.
With Fedora out of the running I haven't decided what we'll use next. I'm
testing a pre-release of Debian Lenny now, and Kubuntu Hardy is downloaded
and ready to try next.
--Mike Bird
1:17 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Craig White wrote:
What I believe it to be is...Those of us who have to put a desktop
system in for other, less skilled users are not eager to put what is
basically a 'dead desktop' in front of those users because they often
save files to their desktop and move them from there.
In what sense is the desktop "dead", as a matter of interest?
--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
8:07 p.m.
On Sun, 2008-06-15 at 00:44 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Mike Bird <mgb-fedora <at> yosemite.net> writes:
> QUESTION TO DEVELOPERS: Is there any hope of a full KDE 3.5
> in F10, plus an upgrade path from F8 to F10 that preserves
> KDE 3.5 configurations?
And a pony too? ;-)
No, versions in Fedora normally move forward, not backwards, and KDE will be no
exception.
> KDE 4.0 is incomplete and not suitable for most users.
Not true, it is completely usable.
> KDE 4.1 will be incomplete and not suitable for most users.
Even less true.
> The KDE devels are debating whether KDE 4.2 will be usable.
That's not true, many of them are already running 4.0 or 4.1 beta, and
especially 4.1 is widely reported to be perfectly usable.
> The pro-plasma crowd argue that it is theoretically possible
> to implement a desktop by KDE 4.2, but that everyone should
> change to using the folderview and forget about real desktops.
The folderview _is_ a real desktop, it will even be set to display ~/Desktop by
default.
> Probably control center will be fixed by KDE 4.2.
"Fixed" how? It already works fine.
> It's debatable whether Dolphin will ever have the usability that
> KDE 3.5 Konqueror had, but if it does it won't be until KDE 4.2
> at the earliest.
That's just not true. Both Dolphin and the embedded DolphinPart in Konqueror
work just fine. Your complaint is also way too vague, you aren't saying what
the usability problems you encountered are.
> F9 already includes a usable KMenu to replace the KDE 4.0 joke,
> although the usable KMenu is not the default.
Well, some people actually like the new Kickoff menu. (For example, we had a
vote among KDE maintainers for the default menu, it ended up 3-2 for the new
one.) And if (like me) you don't like the new menu, the old one is just 2
clicks away, so this is really the wrong thing to complain about.
> I'm not a KDE developer but I do have users that need to get
> work done and they are not interested in a religious conversion
> to plasmoids. After reading a lot of KDE developer discussions
> my best guess is that KDE 4.3 is the earliest possibility for
> most KDE users, but no guarantees.
I think the KDE 4.1.x in F10 will be something rock solid for your users. IMHO
the most annoying issue in F9 is the GTK+ systray icon problem (actually mostly
harmless in practice, just annoying and ugly), which is being worked on
upstream right now, so I expect that we'll be able to fix it in an F9 update a
few days from now, and F10 will almost certainly not ship with that bug. Trust
me, we know what the prime annoyances are and we're scrambling to get them
fixed ASAP, just as we got the real showstoppers fixed before the F9 release.
> This puts us in something of a quandary. F9 KDE 4.0 is hugely
> annoying to most KDE users. F8 KDE 3.5 still works fine of
> course but IIRC security updates will end in six months.
Don't panic. Our KDE 4 will improve a lot in those 6 months. We're already
working on 4.1 in Rawhide, and we're planning to push it to Fedora 9 once the
final 4.1.0 is released. Fedora 10 will ship with a later 4.1.x version, which
means even more bugfixes.
> QUESTION TO DEVELOPERS: Is there any hope of a full KDE 3.5
> in F10, plus an upgrade path from F8 to F10 that preserves
> KDE 3.5 configurations?
No. There is hope of a fully-usable KDE 4.1.x, and of 4.2.x as an update.
----
I just want to say, thanks for all your efforts.
I am not entirely thrilled with KDE 4 on F9 but I don't see any need to
gripe about it but I am certainly not as distressed as the OP.
I will say this about KDE 4 and putting large numbers of users on
it...they do tend to use the Desktop to temporarily save files before
they move them to their permanent home and right now, the Desktop is a
dead space and one has to use Dolphin to move/delete files from the
Desktop. That is holding me back from pushing F9 onto a number of users'
computers.
Craig
3:32 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun, 2008-06-15 at 15:19 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 6:38 AM, Tom Horsley
<tom.horsley(a)att.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 08:22:16 +0100
> Anne Wilson <cannewilson(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Fedora made the only possible decision.
>
> That's the most ridiculous statement I've ever read.
>
> Anyone still trying to delude themselves that fedora
> isn't primarily a beta test for redhat enterprise? :-).
Well if you think Fedora is beta testing KDE 4 for RedHat, you're stupid.
----
Could you please take your insults and denigrations elsewhere because
they're not appreciated here.
Craig
7:50 p.m.
On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 7:09 PM, Bill Davidsen <davidsen(a)tmr.com> wrote:
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 12:25 PM, Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat June 14 2008 10:18:58 Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 11:38 AM, Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net>
>>> wrote:
>>> Any reason not to use F8? I still have F7 on my desktop.. works just
>>> fine.
>>
>> I'm writing this in F8 after reverting back from F9 due to KDE 4.0, but
>> IIRC security updates for F8 end in six months and security updates for
>> F7 just ended.
>
> Yah... don't use your machine on the public internet, don't use
> unnecessary services, you'll be fine.
>
..parse error, meaningless words detected after sequence "don't use your
machine"
The problem is that "use your machine" for most people is not limited to
playing solitaire on a machine without network connections.
Buy a router? Use the software firewall?
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
7:27 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Antonio Olivares wrote:
--- On Sat, 6/14/08, Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net>
wrote:
> From: Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net>
> Subject: Re: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
> To: fedora-list(a)redhat.com
> Date: Saturday, June 14, 2008, 3:48 PM
> On Sat June 14 2008 15:31:04 Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>> Why not use the version of Fedora that last has KDE
> 3.5 if this is
>> such a big deal for you?
> You seem to be looping Arthur. F8 security updates end in
> about six months and no, you're not safe without them.
>
> --Mike Bird
>
> --
How do you define safe?
I have run old version of KDE 3.1 from Mandrake 9.1 gotten on internet, no single update
whatsoever, and I have been safe. So it can be done, do you mean other updates, that can
be critical, with apps and not the desktop here.
That is like saying you have played Russian Roulette twice and not been
killed. It doesn't mean that your are "safe," it just means that the law
of averages has not exhibited "regression to the mean" yet. No computer
is really "safe," but you can reduce the mean time to failure by letting
the evil-doers evolve their attacks without evolving your defenses.z
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen(a)tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
7:09 p.m.
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 12:25 PM, Mike Bird
<mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net> wrote:
> On Sat June 14 2008 10:18:58 Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 11:38 AM, Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net>
wrote:
>> Any reason not to use F8? I still have F7 on my desktop.. works just fine.
> I'm writing this in F8 after reverting back from F9 due to KDE 4.0, but
> IIRC security updates for F8 end in six months and security updates for
> F7 just ended.
Yah... don't use your machine on the public internet, don't use
unnecessary services, you'll be fine.
..parse error, meaningless words detected after sequence "don't use your
machine"
The problem is that "use your machine" for most people is not limited to
playing solitaire on a machine without network connections.
If you have a limited need for functional KDE, a more practical solution
might be to run F8 in a virtual machine, xen, etc.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen(a)tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
3:26 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Kevin Kofler wrote:
> It's used too often as an explanation or excuse for simple
mistakes.
> Everyone makes mistakes.
True, but shipping KDE 4 was NOT a mistake.
I didn't say it was.
But it came with a few (minor) mistakes.
If there are really just 5 of you,
you are doing a fantastic job.
Thanks.
But I think you are only working 18 hours a day.
Come on, you can do with less sleep than that ...
--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
3:35 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 3:32 PM, Craig White <craigwhite(a)azapple.com> wrote:
On Sun, 2008-06-15 at 15:19 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 6:38 AM, Tom Horsley <tom.horsley(a)att.net> wrote:
> > On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 08:22:16 +0100
> > Anne Wilson <cannewilson(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Fedora made the only possible decision.
> >
> > That's the most ridiculous statement I've ever read.
> >
> > Anyone still trying to delude themselves that fedora
> > isn't primarily a beta test for redhat enterprise? :-).
>
>
> Well if you think Fedora is beta testing KDE 4 for RedHat, you're stupid.
----
Could you please take your insults and denigrations elsewhere because
they're not appreciated here.
Apply some logic to that statement.
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
2:59 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun, 2008-06-15 at 18:04 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Craig White <craigwhite <at> azapple.com> writes:
> Kevin Kofler stated it clearly...the 3 Fedora developers made the
> decision without any input from RedHat at all.
Actually we're 5: 4 packagers (Than Ngo, Rex Dieter, Lukáš Tinkl and me) and
one Live CD maintainer (Sebastian Vahl) who also maintains/comaintains some
packages. And there are many other participants in the KDE SIG who did some
work too, for example Pavel Shevchuk (Stalwart) who did the Fedora Waves
KSplash and KDM themes.
Kevin Kofler
I want to thank everyone for their outstanding effort. I stand in awe.
Is KDE 4 perfect? No. Is it going in the right direction? I think so. I
can't wait to see how it develops.
Thanks again.
Fred
1:05 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun, 2008-06-15 at 17:57 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Timothy Murphy <gayleard <at> eircom.net> writes:
> In what sense is the desktop "dead", as a matter of interest?
He means the KDE 4.0 limitation that changes to icons on the desktop are not
reflected on the file system, which means that if you (ab)use the desktop to
store files on, it won't behave as expected. That should be fixed in 4.1 with
the new folderview applet.
----
this is why I know we are on the right track...Kevin definitely
understands.
Craig
1:04 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Craig White <craigwhite <at> azapple.com> writes:
Kevin Kofler stated it clearly...the 3 Fedora developers made the
decision without any input from RedHat at all.
Actually we're 5: 4 packagers (Than Ngo, Rex Dieter, Lukáš Tinkl and me) and
one Live CD maintainer (Sebastian Vahl) who also maintains/comaintains some
packages. And there are many other participants in the KDE SIG who did some
work too, for example Pavel Shevchuk (Stalwart) who did the Fedora Waves
KSplash and KDM themes.
Kevin Kofler
12:57 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Timothy Murphy <gayleard <at> eircom.net> writes:
In what sense is the desktop "dead", as a matter of
interest?
He means the KDE 4.0 limitation that changes to icons on the desktop are not
reflected on the file system, which means that if you (ab)use the desktop to
store files on, it won't behave as expected. That should be fixed in 4.1 with
the new folderview applet.
Kevin Kofler
11:17 a.m.
New subject: Fedora 9 update causes NetworkManager not to work wireless
Folks; I am having problems with NetworkManager and wireless network.
When I installed Fedora 9 NetworkManager was working fine and able to
connect to wireless networks. However, after I did the first update
suggested by the OS, NetworkManager stopped being able to recognize the
WEP of the wireless networks. I formatted and installed Fedora 9 twice
to confirm the problem. I could not however identify which update is
causing this problem. Anybody having the same problem? Solution? Thanks.
11:14 a.m.
Anne Wilson <cannewilson <at> googlemail.com> writes:
Maybe they can't. Some problems can't be fixed until we get
4.1. On the
whole, though, I agree with you. It took a little getting used to, but I do
like it. I'll put up with its shortcomings while it is 4.0. 4.1 is only a
few weeks away.
This has been one of those threads that last and last - and it seems to me
that occasionally frustration with an issue builds up and eventually we
get these everlasting complaints sessions.
I think everyone would probably agree that KDE4 is not perfect at present
but we should accept the real experts' view that underlying this new
desktop is a concept that will eventually not just supercede the old KDE
but will eventually yield a lovely facility that we will get to love
when it is polished and optimised - but it will take a little time.
If you have ever done any programming yourself you will know that getting
optimised bug free code first time round almost never happens barring a
miracle - so gives the devs a break and allow them a bit of time without
too much heckling! A little praise might no go amiss at times either!
I accept that a calculated risk was taken in including KDE as 4.0.3 in F9
but I also accept their judgement and we may well be seeing strong praise
rather than condemnation in F10's lifetime.
As has been said a number of times - you can always stay with F8 for the
moment until KDE4 has 4.1 out the door and that will be in a month or so.
That will still be some months before F10 release by which time KDE4 should
hopefully be a really nice desktop.
I am filing bugs in BZ when I find issues and all of us who are using KDE4
should contribute to its development by doing this. Certainly I have found
that the few people who get changes implemented are generally very responsive
and do a great job in either amending things for Fedora or represent Fedora
interests upstream.
Most of the complainers do not directly fix things - so we all perhaps need
a little patience and do our bit to help rather than simply grumble.
My 2pennyworth...
9:57 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun, 2008-06-15 at 07:38 -0400, Tom Horsley wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 08:22:16 +0100
Anne Wilson <cannewilson(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
> Fedora made the only possible decision.
That's the most ridiculous statement I've ever read.
Anyone still trying to delude themselves that fedora
isn't primarily a beta test for redhat enterprise? :-).
----
One has nothing to do with the other.
Fedora is clearly intended to be leading edge. KDE-4 is clearly leading
edge.
Kevin Kofler stated it clearly...the 3 Fedora developers made the
decision without any input from RedHat at all.
Clearly it was not the only possible decision but it was the decision
that they made.
Craig
11:01 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun, 2008-06-15 at 10:47 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
max bianco wrote:
> KDE 4.0 is already way better than its predecessor. I used KDE before
> I started using Fedora but not after, it was the ugliest KDE i had
> seen. KDE is moving in the right direction as far as I am concerned
> but what do i know, i was in the minority when i bitched about the
> ugly KDE of yesteryear, I am in the minority again it seems.
I think it's mostly that those who are unhappy are simply the most vocal about it,
which is why basing decisions based only "the squeeky wheel" is rarely wise.
----
What I believe it to be is...Those of us who have to put a desktop
system in for other, less skilled users are not eager to put what is
basically a 'dead desktop' in front of those users because they often
save files to their desktop and move them from there. This is a very
real problem....I made it clear yesterday and Kevin responded to it
adequately. For those of us in that position, it seems advantageous to
hang with F7/F8 for a while longer.
The rest of the griping seems to be individual users who are unwilling
to deal with some feature regression for the short term for the benefit
of a feature rich future. Those opinions I pretty much dismiss summarily
since you guys already made that decision for them. Hanging with F7 or
F8 for a while for those people certainly is an option too.
Thanks Rex and Kevin for your efforts, your considerations and taking
the abuse which I would think is unwarranted but others don't share my
opinion.
Craig
10:53 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Kevin Kofler wrote:
Mike Bird <mgb-fedora <at> yosemite.net> writes:
> It's hard to believe that Red Hat would ship KDE 4.1 in F10,
but if
s/Red Hat/the Fedora Project/
This decision was not made by Red Hat, it was made by the Fedora KDE
maintainers, and the Fedora KDE SIG as a whole.
<shameless plug>
Fwiw, the KDE SIG is open to new ideas, help, criticism, participation, whatever. If
anyone is open and willing to help steer the direction of fedora/kde, feel free to join
the effort and participate:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE
</shameless plug>
10:47 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
max bianco wrote:
KDE 4.0 is already way better than its predecessor. I used KDE
before
I started using Fedora but not after, it was the ugliest KDE i had
seen. KDE is moving in the right direction as far as I am concerned
but what do i know, i was in the minority when i bitched about the
ugly KDE of yesteryear, I am in the minority again it seems.
I think it's mostly that those who are unhappy are simply the most vocal about it,
which is why basing decisions based only "the squeeky wheel" is rarely wise.
-- Rex
10:44 a.m.
Joonas Sarajärvi wrote:
> KDE 4.1 will be incomplete and not suitable for most users.
Software is rarely complete, but I find even KDE 4.0 very usable,
though far from perfect.
I found KDE 4.0 a real disappointment, especially when I was really
looking forward to using it. I think it's currently lacking a lot of
what I liked about KDE 3.5.x.
I find Dolphin to be actually much better for file management
than any Konqueror version I have ever tried. It's probably
just a matter of preference.
Yes I think the previous problem with konqueror was the bewildering
range of options and views, many of which weren't that practical,
Dolphin fairs much better in that respect.
I think the new menu is great.
Seriously? I think it's just god awful. I find it slow to navigate
through and just plain awkward to use, I'm thankful they've left the
option in to switch to the classic menu system.
I usually don't want to browser for
the application I am looking for in nested menus. The new menu
lets me just type a few letters and have me launch the program
instantly, of use the favorites feature.
Doesn't seem too different from the old menus, frequently used apps etc
were stored at the top of the menu, and well I could always type a
program by name from konsole but then I had all my favourite apps on my
taskbar for one-click launching which sadly appears missing from KDE 4.
--
Ian Chapman.
10:34 a.m.
On Sunday 15 June 2008 15:47:38 Timothy Murphy wrote:
Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> KDE 4.0 is incomplete and not suitable for most users.
>
> Not true, it is completely usable.
While the OP was over the top,
there are a surprising (to me) number of minor problems
with KDE-4 under Fedora-9.
I'm a little surprised, too, that they haven't been
sorted out sooner.
Examples: 1) "Stickiness" of applications in the panel.
When I click normally on eg my Firefox icon, nothing happens (usually).
I have to hold down the button for a second,
and sometimes I have to click a second time.
That used to be a problem on my Fedora box, but isn't, any longer. Now I
usually get an immediate response.
2) KNotify crashes when I shut down.
(This has been in bugzilla for ages.)
I'm still seeing that one. It's annoying, but not a show-stopper.
3) Sometimes I get a "ghost" image on the screen in one of
my desktops,
which won't go away.
This doesn't actually matter, as I can open a window on top of it.
Haven't seen that one.
In spite of these minor problems, I like KDE-4
and would not revert to KDE-3 even if I could.
Maybe the Fedora/KDE team could try to sort out problems a little faster?
Maybe they can't. Some problems can't be fixed until we get 4.1. On the
whole, though, I agree with you. It took a little getting used to, but I do
like it. I'll put up with its shortcomings while it is 4.0. 4.1 is only a
few weeks away.
Anne
10:09 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Anne Wilson wrote:
And as such, it's often been said that it's not a distro for
general
desktop
use, particularly in a production environment. Either people can't read,
or just refuse to learn.
I don't agree with this often-repeated sentiment.
It's used too often as an explanation or excuse for simple mistakes.
Everyone makes mistakes.
In my experience Fedora makes no more (or less) than other distributions.
Fedora standard distribution is not in my view "bleeding edge".
The OP who is threatening to go to KUbuntu
will find just as many mistakes there.
--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
10:08 a.m.
On Sun, 2008-06-15 at 15:47 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> KDE 4.0 is incomplete and not suitable for most users.
>
> Not true, it is completely usable.
While the OP was over the top,
there are a surprising (to me) number of minor problems
with KDE-4 under Fedora-9.
I'm a little surprised, too, that they haven't been
sorted out sooner.
Examples: 1) "Stickiness" of applications in the panel.
When I click normally on eg my Firefox icon, nothing happens (usually).
I have to hold down the button for a second,
and sometimes I have to click a second time.
Never seen that.
2) KNotify crashes when I shut down.
(This has been in bugzilla for ages.)
Seen that very occasionally.
3) Sometimes I get a "ghost" image on the screen in one of
my desktops,
which won't go away.
Never seen that.
One thing I do see (and assume is in BZ though I really should check) is
messed-up window decorations for a newly-created window, e.g. the title
bar is half-drawn and some of the buttons don't appear. As soon as I
grab the window and move it slightly, it fixes itself. It doesn't seem
to depend on the theme as I've tried several.
poc
9:47 a.m.
Kevin Kofler wrote:
> KDE 4.0 is incomplete and not suitable for most users.
Not true, it is completely usable.
While the OP was over the top,
there are a surprising (to me) number of minor problems
with KDE-4 under Fedora-9.
I'm a little surprised, too, that they haven't been
sorted out sooner.
Examples: 1) "Stickiness" of applications in the panel.
When I click normally on eg my Firefox icon, nothing happens (usually).
I have to hold down the button for a second,
and sometimes I have to click a second time.
2) KNotify crashes when I shut down.
(This has been in bugzilla for ages.)
3) Sometimes I get a "ghost" image on the screen in one of my desktops,
which won't go away.
This doesn't actually matter, as I can open a window on top of it.
In spite of these minor problems, I like KDE-4
and would not revert to KDE-3 even if I could.
Maybe the Fedora/KDE team could try to sort out problems a little faster?
--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
6:56 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sunday 15 June 2008 12:38, Tom Horsley wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 08:22:16 +0100
Anne Wilson <cannewilson(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
> Fedora made the only possible decision.
That's the most ridiculous statement I've ever read.
Anyone still trying to delude themselves that fedora
isn't primarily a beta test for redhat enterprise? :-).
Fedora would not exist without RHEL. Think about it.
Anne
6:38 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 08:22:16 +0100
Anne Wilson <cannewilson(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
Fedora made the only possible decision.
That's the most ridiculous statement I've ever read.
Anyone still trying to delude themselves that fedora
isn't primarily a beta test for redhat enterprise? :-).
2:26 a.m.
On Sunday 15 June 2008 01:44:31 Kevin Kofler wrote:
> It's debatable whether Dolphin will ever have the usability
that
> KDE 3.5 Konqueror had, but if it does it won't be until KDE 4.2
> at the earliest.
That's just not true. Both Dolphin and the embedded DolphinPart in
Konqueror work just fine. Your complaint is also way too vague, you aren't
saying what the usability problems you encountered are.
Having had a little more time with dolphin I've found that I'm happy with it
for some situations and prefer konqueror for others. KDE continues to give
us such choices. What a surprise! :-)
Anne
12:18 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 11:30 PM, Ric Moore <wayward4now(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 14:58 -0700, Mike Bird wrote:
> On Sat June 14 2008 14:21:29 Antonio Olivares wrote:
> > stay here and write many, many bug reports, rally the troops in hopes of
> > making KDE 4.X the best KDE that is possible, take the positives the good
> > things and try to turn your face to bad things, the things you do not like
> > about KDE. In all the bad, there has to be something good. Okular is very
> > good. Evince is also. I can use either or to view multiple document
> > formats, ie., dvi, pdf, ps, etc. . Let the battle to which desktop in
> > Fedora 9 or higher begin, which one earns your respect and choice after
> > all, you can make other statements that can make more impact.
>
> There is reason to hope that in a couple of years KDE 4.x will be better
> than KDE 3.5, but for now KDE 4.x is unproductive for most users.
>
> Distros that don't provide KDE 3.5 for their KDE users while KDE 4.x is
> being developed will simply lose most of their KDE users. That is not a
> good thing for Fedora and that is not a good thing for Red Hat. And there
> are things I'd rather be doing than migrating a bunch of installations to
> some other distro.
Installing CentOS tomorrow. I've got almost 1,500 members and
participating organizations in KDE's PIM Kaddressbook for our
Non-Profit. Can't do without it. I understand that it isn't in KDE4 as
of yet. No support for KDE3 so I gotta dance with who brung me.
Kaddressbook uses a plaintext open format for its data, I am sure
other apps can open it
My own two cents is that it might have been better if KDE3 been left
in
by default and introduce KDE4 into testing. That approach could've kept
people, like myself, putting up with all the other blowups. Fedora, You
all have just gone past the point of audience participation for me. This
is a damn sad day, but it's been one heckuva ride.
Happy Trails, Ric
KDE4 was in testing first. All the risks were very clear before the
release. Everyone is responsible to make an informed decision before
upgrading, regardless of the operating system
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
2:33 a.m.
On Sunday 15 June 2008 04:40:47 David Boles wrote:
Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Mike Bird <mgb-fedora <at> yosemite.net> writes:
>> We all make mistakes. Shipping KDE 4.0 in F9 was a mistake.
>> It would be insulting to the members of the Fedora KDE SIG
>> to assume that they would repeat their mistake in F10. Hence
>> the title of this thread.
>
> Oh, and I forgot in my previous message: even IF shipping KDE 4.0.3 in F9
> was a mistake (which I don't agree it was), that still would not imply
> that shipping KDE 4.1.x in F10 will also be a mistake, because KDE 4 will
> have improved by then.
>
> Kevin Kofler
Take a deep breath Kevin. You did the right thing. This is almost like a
troll convention around here. ;-)
It has already been said, several times, that it is possible to do almost
everything in KDE4 that was done in KDE3, but some things have to be done
differently. Yes, the difference in icons on the desktop is something of an
annoyance, but it takes little effort to work around it.
As for not giving F9 to naive users because of this, who in their senses would
give the first version of anything to naive users if there is a usable
alternative. Keep them on F8 for now, but for heavens sake help fix any
problems instead of this incessant whining.
Anne
2:22 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sunday 15 June 2008 05:30:00 Ric Moore wrote:
Installing CentOS tomorrow. I've got almost 1,500 members and
participating organizations in KDE's PIM Kaddressbook for our
Non-Profit. Can't do without it. I understand that it isn't in KDE4 as
of yet. No support for KDE3 so I gotta dance with who brung me.
I don't know who told you that, Ric, but it's just plain wrong. The new
pim
is not ready yet, but the whole of kontact from v.3 works perfectly in KDE4.
I use it, including calendar and addressbook.
My own two cents is that it might have been better if KDE3 been left
in
by default and introduce KDE4 into testing. That approach could've kept
people, like myself, putting up with all the other blowups. Fedora, You
all have just gone past the point of audience participation for me. This
is a damn sad day, but it's been one heckuva ride.
Two points there. First, by its very nature Fedora must have the latest.
Second, how are the bugs going to be found if the desktop is not introduced
to people?
Fedora made the only possible decision. We should always remember that Fedora
does not set out to be the stable desktop required in most production
situations. You use it at your peril, The fact that it actually works in
most situations is a bonus.
Anne
2:01 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 1:48 AM, Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net> wrote:
On Sat June 14 2008 23:37:18 Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> The "Fedora KDE" team is facing pressure on several fronts
Please elaborate. If the team's decision was coerced that
would place them in a much less unfavorable light.
I wasn't clear, pressure _in general_ (few resources, big tasks, little help)
And all decisions have taken place in the open (public mailing lists,
irc channels).
And I also want to be clear that I am speaking on behalf of myself as
a casual observer of the KDE effort in Fedora for a few years now.
(if I haven't been clear about anything else, let me know)
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
1:48 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat June 14 2008 23:37:18 Arthur Pemberton wrote:
The "Fedora KDE" team is facing pressure on several fronts
Please elaborate. If the team's decision was coerced that
would place them in a much less unfavorable light.
--Mike Bird
1:37 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 1:27 AM, Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net> wrote:
On Sat June 14 2008 22:42:06 Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> What is your suggestion?
We all make mistakes. Some people deny their mistakes. Some
people admit their mistakes, learn from them, and grow. The
Fedora KDE team has made it clear where they stand.
If you had no suggestions, you could just say so. I am fully aware of
all the variables at work.
The "Fedora KDE" team is facing pressure on several fronts, and is
receiving very little assistance. There was a period of discussion on
all these things which you are now complaining about. The people doing
the work came to a conclusion. I myself do not feel competent to judge
their decision. I knew things would be rocky in F8,F9,F10 and so my
desktop is still F7. My software still works, I haven't been hacked.
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
1:27 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat June 14 2008 22:42:06 Arthur Pemberton wrote:
What is your suggestion?
We all make mistakes. Some people deny their mistakes. Some
people admit their mistakes, learn from them, and grow. The
Fedora KDE team has made it clear where they stand.
KDE 4.x has good-looking icons, and technology which may one
day be useful, but for now KDE 4.x just gets in the way of
doing work.
Ric will be installing CentOS tomorrow. I respect his decision
but I've lost respect for Red Hat. Pulseaudio, desktops that
can't logoff, and now trying to force us to use KDE 4.x before
it's usable. I think it'll be Debian Lenny or Kubuntu Hardy LTS:
http://ekaia.org/blog/2008/06/08/lets-go-for-kde-359-in-lenny/
http://kubuntu.org/announcements/8.04-release.php
--Mike Bird
12:42 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 12:38 AM, Tim <ignored_mailbox(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote:
On Sun, 2008-06-15 at 00:18 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> All the risks were very clear before the release. Everyone is
> responsible to make an informed decision before upgrading, regardless
> of the operating system
While there's a choice, now, for whether to upgrade to 9. In several
months time, it won't be the same choice. It'll be stay on an
unsupported OS, change OS, or upgrade to 9 and put up with KDE (if it's
not fixed up by then).
KDE seems to be another thing in a line of really-really-not-ready-yet
things put into mainstream (e.g. network manager, pulseaudio) rather
than staying in testing for longer.
Way back on 7, alsa had got to the point where several different
programs could, and did, all make sounds simultaneously (e.g. pidgin
could make noises while an ogg was playing in something else). Then the
baby gets thrown out with the bathwater for a pulseaudio which promises
to do the same, but doesn't.
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.25.6-55.fc9.i686
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.
What is your suggestion?
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
12:38 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun, 2008-06-15 at 00:18 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
All the risks were very clear before the release. Everyone is
responsible to make an informed decision before upgrading, regardless
of the operating system
While there's a choice, now, for whether to upgrade to 9. In several
months time, it won't be the same choice. It'll be stay on an
unsupported OS, change OS, or upgrade to 9 and put up with KDE (if it's
not fixed up by then).
KDE seems to be another thing in a line of really-really-not-ready-yet
things put into mainstream (e.g. network manager, pulseaudio) rather
than staying in testing for longer.
Way back on 7, alsa had got to the point where several different
programs could, and did, all make sounds simultaneously (e.g. pidgin
could make noises while an ogg was playing in something else). Then the
baby gets thrown out with the bathwater for a pulseaudio which promises
to do the same, but doesn't.
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.25.6-55.fc9.i686
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.
11:30 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 14:58 -0700, Mike Bird wrote:
On Sat June 14 2008 14:21:29 Antonio Olivares wrote:
> stay here and write many, many bug reports, rally the troops in hopes of
> making KDE 4.X the best KDE that is possible, take the positives the good
> things and try to turn your face to bad things, the things you do not like
> about KDE. In all the bad, there has to be something good. Okular is very
> good. Evince is also. I can use either or to view multiple document
> formats, ie., dvi, pdf, ps, etc. . Let the battle to which desktop in
> Fedora 9 or higher begin, which one earns your respect and choice after
> all, you can make other statements that can make more impact.
There is reason to hope that in a couple of years KDE 4.x will be better
than KDE 3.5, but for now KDE 4.x is unproductive for most users.
Distros that don't provide KDE 3.5 for their KDE users while KDE 4.x is
being developed will simply lose most of their KDE users. That is not a
good thing for Fedora and that is not a good thing for Red Hat. And there
are things I'd rather be doing than migrating a bunch of installations to
some other distro.
Installing CentOS tomorrow. I've got almost 1,500 members and
participating organizations in KDE's PIM Kaddressbook for our
Non-Profit. Can't do without it. I understand that it isn't in KDE4 as
of yet. No support for KDE3 so I gotta dance with who brung me.
My own two cents is that it might have been better if KDE3 been left in
by default and introduce KDE4 into testing. That approach could've kept
people, like myself, putting up with all the other blowups. Fedora, You
all have just gone past the point of audience participation for me. This
is a damn sad day, but it's been one heckuva ride.
Happy Trails, Ric
--
----------------------------------------------------
My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
Linux user# 44256 Sign up at: http://counter.li.org/
http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/oar
https://oar.dev.java.net/
Verizon Cell # 336-254-1339
-----------------------------------------------------
10:58 p.m.
On Sun, 2008-06-15 at 03:13 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
RHEL (and thus also CentOS) usually gets support for newer hardware
backported in the point releases. So 5.1 already supports newer
hardware than a stock 2.6.18 kernel did,
Useful to know. My foray into CentOS is fairly recently, and I've not
learnt all the tricks yet.
and 5.2 (which will be out in a few days, see
http://misterd77.blogspot.com/2008/06/centos-52-release-update.html
Thanks for that. I'd been looking for a 5.2 release date, and couldn't
find any clues. I'd read that the RHEL had came out, and they expected
a *few* weeks would be needed before CentOS could be updated, but
nothing more specific than that. At least that message says they've
built it and are testing it, that's more than what I'd already found
out.
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.25.6-55.fc9.i686
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.
10:40 p.m.
Kevin Kofler wrote:
Mike Bird <mgb-fedora <at> yosemite.net> writes:
> We all make mistakes. Shipping KDE 4.0 in F9 was a mistake.
> It would be insulting to the members of the Fedora KDE SIG
> to assume that they would repeat their mistake in F10. Hence
> the title of this thread.
Oh, and I forgot in my previous message: even IF shipping KDE 4.0.3 in F9 was a
mistake (which I don't agree it was), that still would not imply that shipping
KDE 4.1.x in F10 will also be a mistake, because KDE 4 will have improved by
then.
Kevin Kofler
Take a deep breath Kevin. You did the right thing. This is almost like a troll
convention around here. ;-)
--
David
10:13 p.m.
Tim <ignored_mailbox <at> yahoo.com.au> writes:
On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 13:16 -0700, Mike Bird wrote:
> According to DistroWatch, CentOS is only up to kernel 2.6.18
> which rules it out for newer desktops and laptops
Confirmed. CentOS 5.1 has 2.6.18-53.1.21 as the most recent update.
RHEL (and thus also CentOS) usually gets support for newer hardware backported
in the point releases. So 5.1 already supports newer hardware than a stock
2.6.18 kernel did, and 5.2 (which will be out in a few days, see
http://misterd77.blogspot.com/2008/06/centos-52-release-update.html - the
corresponding RHEL has already been out for a few weeks) will support even more
new hardware (see
http://www.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/5.2/html/Releas...
).
Kevin Kofler
10:05 p.m.
Mike Bird <mgb-fedora <at> yosemite.net> writes:
We all make mistakes. Shipping KDE 4.0 in F9 was a mistake.
It would be insulting to the members of the Fedora KDE SIG
to assume that they would repeat their mistake in F10. Hence
the title of this thread.
Oh, and I forgot in my previous message: even IF shipping KDE 4.0.3 in F9 was a
mistake (which I don't agree it was), that still would not imply that shipping
KDE 4.1.x in F10 will also be a mistake, because KDE 4 will have improved by
then.
Kevin Kofler
10 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 19:39 -0700, Antonio Olivares wrote:
--- On Sat, 6/14/08, Patrick O'Callaghan
<pocallaghan(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Patrick O'Callaghan <pocallaghan(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
> To: fedora-list(a)redhat.com
> Date: Saturday, June 14, 2008, 6:06 PM
> On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 17:58 -0700, Mike Bird wrote:
> > It's hard to believe that Red Hat would ship KDE
> 4.1 in F10, but if
> > it does KDE users will just choose another distro and
> install it.
>
> This one definitely won't.
>
> poc
>
> --
You mean Red Hat shipping KDE 4.1 in F10 right?
or this part
but if it does, KDE users will just choose another distro and install it.
Because the second part seems very possible for many users that are upset with KDE 4.1.
The first part surely won't happen, but the next is subjective to the users which
have every right to do it.
Obviously. I meant I would not be one of them.
poc
9:59 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
--- On Sat, 6/14/08, Antonio Olivares <olivares14031(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Antonio Olivares <olivares14031(a)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
To: "For users of Fedora" <fedora-list(a)redhat.com>
Date: Saturday, June 14, 2008, 7:39 PM
--- On Sat, 6/14/08, Patrick O'Callaghan
<pocallaghan(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Patrick O'Callaghan
<pocallaghan(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it
too !
> To: fedora-list(a)redhat.com
> Date: Saturday, June 14, 2008, 6:06 PM
> On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 17:58 -0700, Mike Bird wrote:
> > It's hard to believe that Red Hat would ship
KDE
> 4.1 in F10, but if
> > it does KDE users will just choose another distro
and
> install it.
>
> This one definitely won't.
>
> poc
>
> --
You mean Red Hat shipping KDE 4.1 in F10 right?
or this part
but if it does, KDE users will just choose another distro
and install it.
Because the second part seems very possible for many users
that are upset with KDE 4.1.
No one should be upset with KDE 4.1 yet, it has not
been released. Clikced on send too quick :(.
Anyhow, KDE reminds me of the "No Child Left Behind Act",
http://www.ed.gov/nclb/landing.jhtml
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Child_Left_Behind_Act
All students will succeed in learning according to this act. 100 % of students will pass
the state mandated exams. We all know that is impossible, yet the Federal Government
blessed the Act and holds all schools accountable. As many educators across the nations
pointed out,
"Your child will not be left behind", he/she will take a little bit longer to
get there.
No offense to KDE developers. They are doing their best to iron out all the bugs and
given time, KDE should be back and working as best it can. The world was not created in 1
day. Was KDE rushed? We can go on forever discussing this and we will not go anywhere
:(. What we can do, is continue to work and hope that users and developers can come
together in improving KDE. BTW, I hope that the real digital clock comes back :) How
many users would like to have it as well?
Regards,
Antonio
The first part surely won't happen, but the next is
subjective to the users which have every right to do it.
Regards,
Antonio
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list(a)redhat.com
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
9:57 p.m.
Mike Bird <mgb-fedora <at> yosemite.net> writes:
Unfortunately it is true. Many of the KDE devels believe
4.0 should not have been shipped, and are upset that 4.1
will also ship with such a poor desktop.
[snip]
Just because people post to kde-devel doesn't mean they actually are KDE
developers. The people who complain and want to fork KDE are not KDE
developers, they might not even have written a single line of KDE code. Some
actual KDE developers, such as Aaron J. Seigo, have intervened in that thread,
but they are not the ones who think 4.0 should not have been shipped and want
to fork KDE.
The KDE devels' [sic, see above] debate can be fairly summarized
as:
A. We shouldn't be shipping 4.x in this state.
B. Plasma can do everything that 3.5 could do.
A. When? 4.2? 4.3?
B. Yeah, maybe.
That's a fairly bad summary of what the KDE developers really think, you have
probably been misled by FUD from the complainers and/or misunderstood
something.
What you're also missing is that Plasma can already do things KDE 3.5 can't
(for example, several Plasmoids can be put either on the desktop or on the
panel at your own discretion, and automatically adapt to the different form
factor - try putting a KDE 3 Superkaramba widget into the panel or a KDE 3
Kicker panel applet onto the desktop) and that "Plasma can do everything that
3.5 could do." is not a necessary condition for Plasma to be usable.
We all make mistakes. Shipping KDE 4.0 in F9 was a mistake.
No, it was not.
It would be insulting to the members of the Fedora KDE SIG
to assume that they would repeat their mistake in F10.
Uh, I'm one of those members of the Fedora KDE SIG, and it's your accusation of
having made a mistake which offends me.
Fedora 10 will ship with KDE 4.1.x.
Kevin Kofler
9:38 p.m.
Craig White <craigwhite <at> azapple.com> writes:
I will say this about KDE 4 and putting large numbers of users on
it...they do tend to use the Desktop to temporarily save files before
they move them to their permanent home and right now, the Desktop is a
dead space and one has to use Dolphin to move/delete files from the
Desktop. That is holding me back from pushing F9 onto a number of users'
computers.
As far as I know, that will work better with the folderview plasmoid in KDE 4.1
(already implemented in 4.1 beta1, so it will be part of 4.1 for sure). It's
true that the KDE 4.0 "every icon is a plasmoid of its own" implementation is
suboptimal and incomplete, it was a quick hack which was made so KDE 4.0
doesn't have to ship with no support for desktop icons at all.
Kevin Kofler
9:42 p.m.
On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 13:16 -0700, Mike Bird wrote:
According to DistroWatch, CentOS is only up to kernel 2.6.18
which rules it out for newer desktops and laptops
Confirmed. CentOS 5.1 has 2.6.18-53.1.21 as the most recent update.
I'd been toying with putting it on a laptop, but playing with it on a
desktop makes me think it's best for servers or work horse machines (it
doesn't have the range of toys that Fedora has, for instance), and I
hadn't thought of the issues of trying to run it on new laptop hardware
until your post.
I've played with Ubuntu, but it's so different from what I'm used to. I
haven't found any good motivation for such a radical move.
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.25.6-55.fc9.i686
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.
9:39 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
--- On Sat, 6/14/08, Patrick O'Callaghan <pocallaghan(a)gmail.com> wrote:
From: Patrick O'Callaghan <pocallaghan(a)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
To: fedora-list(a)redhat.com
Date: Saturday, June 14, 2008, 6:06 PM
On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 17:58 -0700, Mike Bird wrote:
> It's hard to believe that Red Hat would ship KDE
4.1 in F10, but if
> it does KDE users will just choose another distro and
install it.
This one definitely won't.
poc
--
You mean Red Hat shipping KDE 4.1 in F10 right?
or this part
but if it does, KDE users will just choose another distro and install it.
Because the second part seems very possible for many users that are upset with KDE 4.1.
The first part surely won't happen, but the next is subjective to the users which have
every right to do it.
Regards,
Antonio
9:37 p.m.
On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 22:17 +0300, Joonas Sarajärvi wrote:
I find Dolphin to be actually much better for file management
than any Konqueror version I have ever tried.
Having played with Nautilus, Konqueror, and scoured through a few
reviews with webshots of Dolphin, I don't think any of them are really
"file managers," merely file browsers.
There's a significant distinction between something that lets you look
at content on the drive (browsers), and something that gives you good
tools for controlled & semi-automated manipulation of drive content
(managers).
e.g. You want to compare your hard drive with your backup, your two-pane
file manager should have a feature that takes two directories, checks
their both the same, and makes it easy for you to work on the
differences.
e.g. You move a bunch of files from one spot to another, and suddenly
the whole thing (or partially) aborts because there's duplicates.
There's no easy way to handle what to do with the duplicates (compare
that they're really identical duplicates, replace, skip, rename, rename
with YOUR choice of pattern, etc.), without aborting.
e.g. Batch renaming stupid filenames in a lister (e.g. lower-case
everything with good handling of what to do when the renaming is about
to rename one file to the same name as another file, likewise for
removing or replacing spaces, or converting mixes of dashes and
underlines to just one form of punctuation, etc.).
All of that sort of thing, and more, without having to do mental
gymnastics to work out regex expressions in your head.
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.25.6-55.fc9.i686
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.
9:30 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Mike Bird <mgb-fedora <at> yosemite.net> writes:
I would rather not change distros unless I have to, I'm hoping
that
KDE 4.x in F9 was a mistake that won't be repeated. I'm hoping that
Fedora will include KDE 3.5 until KDE 4.x is ready for prime time.
Then you're hoping for the impossible. As one of the people involved, I can
tell you that KDE 4 in Fedora 9 was not a mistake, but a very carefully made
decision, that there are no plans to revert to KDE 3 (which would likely break
upgrades from F9 in several ways, and would just generally be a
counterproductive step backwards) or propose both versions (which would be a
lot of work and also mean violating the standard FHS directory layout, at least
in spirit) in Fedora 10 and that I would be strongly opposed to any such plans.
It's hard to believe that Red Hat would ship KDE 4.1 in F10, but
if
s/Red Hat/the Fedora Project/
This decision was not made by Red Hat, it was made by the Fedora KDE
maintainers, and the Fedora KDE SIG as a whole. Most KDE SIG members are not
Red Hat employees. I do not work for Red Hat and neither do Rex Dieter,
Sebastian Vahl etc. And to the best of my knowledge, the Red Hat KDE packagers
(Than Ngo and Lukáš Tinkl) haven't been told what KDE version to ship by Red
Hat's management either. Of course I can't speak for Red Hat, but I believe
they trust us who actually work on KDE to do the right thing.
Kevin Kofler
9:26 p.m.
New subject: [OT] Are security updates necessary?
On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 11:18 -0700, Mike Bird wrote:
Provided you also don't browse the web, read emails, or accept
documents from others, then maybe you don't need security updates.
I still have a few FC3 servers behind multiple layers of firewalls
but in general I wouldn't recommend living without security updates.
It's not just security updates that you miss out on, with old releases,
but also bug fixes. Not to mention trying to get things to work with
seriously out-of-date unsupported other things.
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.25.6-55.fc9.i686
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.
9:11 p.m.
On Sat June 14 2008 17:44:31 Kevin Kofler wrote:
Mike Bird <mgb-fedora <at> yosemite.net> writes:
> The KDE devels are debating whether KDE 4.2 will be usable.
That's not true
Unfortunately it is true. Many of the KDE devels believe
4.0 should not have been shipped, and are upset that 4.1
will also ship with such a poor desktop.
The KDE devels' debate can be fairly summarized as:
A. We shouldn't be shipping 4.x in this state.
B. Plasma can do everything that 3.5 could do.
A. When? 4.2? 4.3?
B. Yeah, maybe.
e.g. http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-devel&m=121309298223054&w=2
We all make mistakes. Shipping KDE 4.0 in F9 was a mistake.
It would be insulting to the members of the Fedora KDE SIG
to assume that they would repeat their mistake in F10. Hence
the title of this thread.
--Mike Bird
8:31 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 8:24 PM, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler(a)chello.at> wrote:
Tom Horsley <tom.horsley <at> att.net> writes:
> That depends, maybe RedHat thinks it would be a good thing if they
> didn't have to fool with KDE anymore .
Oh no, not that conspiracy theory again!
The only RH people involved with the decision to ship KDE 4 as the KDE desktop
from Fedora 9 on were the 2 KDE maintainers, and they did not take that
decision alone, it was done by all the KDE comaintainers, including the
community ones. We have no secret agenda to kill KDE, quite the opposite! (Just
ask those who have been involved in discussions with me about the role of KDE
in Fedora. I'm the one who always complains when KDE doesn't get equal
treatment with GNOME.) None of the people you suspect of trying to kill KDE
were involved in the decision to ship KDE 4 (and only KDE 4) in any way.
Kevin Kofler
KDE 4.0 is already way better than its predecessor. I used KDE before
I started using Fedora but not after, it was the ugliest KDE i had
seen. KDE is moving in the right direction as far as I am concerned
but what do i know, i was in the minority when i bitched about the
ugly KDE of yesteryear, I am in the minority again it seems.
--
If opinions were really like assholes we'd each have just one
7:58 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat June 14 2008 16:59:39 Antonio Olivares wrote:
You want the latest and greatest except for KDE
and not have to work at it, is not possible.
I've installed software the hard way - floppy tar balls in the 90's,
Unix v7 from mag tape in the 80's, paper tape in the 70's, and punched
cards in the 60's. I've programmed two brands of minicomputer directly
through the front panel toggle switches.
But these days the sensible course is to choose a distro and install it.
One has a moral duty to provide bug reports and patches to upstream
where they will help everyone, but there is no moral duty to stay
with a distro if the devels repeatedly exhibit bad judgment. Since
I would rather not change distros unless I have to, I'm hoping that
KDE 4.x in F9 was a mistake that won't be repeated. I'm hoping that
Fedora will include KDE 3.5 until KDE 4.x is ready for prime time.
My loyalty is to keeping my systems secure and my users productive.
It's hard to believe that Red Hat would ship KDE 4.1 in F10, but if
it does KDE users will just choose another distro and install it.
--Mike Bird
7:43 p.m.
New subject: [OT] Are security updates necessary?
Mike Bird wrote:
On Sat June 14 2008 16:37:11 Antonio Olivares wrote:
> I have run old version of KDE 3.1 from Mandrake 9.1 gotten on internet, no
> single update whatsoever, and I have been safe. So it can be done, do you
> mean other updates, that can be critical, with apps and not the desktop
> here.
>
Some people manage to walk through a minefield without being blown up.
They were lucky, but not safe.
Security bugs have been fixed in web browsing, email, firewalls,
displaying pictures, viewing pdfs, and opening documents. Without
those fixes your system may not have been compromised (but how to
be certain, eh?) but you certainly would not have been safe.
Meanwhile, back at the KDE ranch ...
--Mike Bird
I don't use KDE as a desktop, just use the applications in Gnome. So
maybe this isn't true, but I think your argument falls apart as far as
security goes. I expect no one at KDE will be maintaining 3.5. No more
security patches, no more enhancements. All the work will be on 4.x
from now on.
I suggest sticking with Fedora 8 during its lifetime, and seeing how far
KDE 4 gets in the meantime. There has already been an update on the KDE
stuff in Fedora 9. In 6 months you might consider it usable.
This reminds me of the Vista / XP kerfuffle. I think that the Fedora
team might be putting out releases because of a schedule, not because
there are significant enhancements that are ready. Maybe they could
slow the pace down by a month or two. That being said, I've had only
two real problems in Fedora 9. The firefox/pdflush/kjournald contention
issue that locks up any app doing disk IO, and a problem with the scsi
driver that fails to read the superblock on my DVDRW most of the time.
Every release has a few rough edges that get ground down until it is
comfortable. I expect these to get resolved as well.
Good luck to you, whichever choice you make.
7:26 p.m.
New subject: [OT] Are security updates necessary?
--- On Sat, 6/14/08, Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net> wrote:
From: Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net>
Subject: Re: [OT] Are security updates necessary?
To: fedora-list(a)redhat.com
Date: Saturday, June 14, 2008, 5:06 PM
On Sat June 14 2008 16:37:11 Antonio Olivares wrote:
> I have run old version of KDE 3.1 from Mandrake 9.1
gotten on internet, no
> single update whatsoever, and I have been safe. So it
can be done, do you
> mean other updates, that can be critical, with apps
and not the desktop
> here.
Some people manage to walk through a minefield without
being blown up.
They were lucky, but not safe.
We are never guaranteed anything in life. There are only two sure things,
Death and Taxes :(
<quote from http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/b/benjamin_franklin.html>
Certainty? In this world nothing is certain but death and taxes.
Benjamin Franklin
</quote>
Security bugs have been fixed in web browsing, email,
firewalls,
displaying pictures, viewing pdfs, and opening documents.
Without
those fixes your system may not have been compromised (but
how to
be certain, eh?) but you certainly would not have been
safe.
Yes, I found out later, so I trashed Mandrake and installed FreeBSD onto that
machine :) Fedora would not install, Fedora 8/Fedora 9 would I complain? not so (Machine
is too old, so I cannot blame Fedora/Fedora Developers/other fellow Fedora users). I
connect to the internet with Slax on that machine, since I do not want to waste time
configuring ppp in FreeBSD. I can connect with RoFreeSBIE to the internet if I want to,
but I prefer Slax here. It works for me like I want it. It at least works, and is not
taking up space at a dumpster.
Meanwhile, back at the KDE ranch ...
This is a very hard issue, and I kind of understand your points and many other
users might sympathize with you, if you have been on this list for sometime, I kind of
hinted that many KDE users would be unhappy, but that is the price one has to pay for
innovation. Still KDE4 is functional, but if you want to use it in Fedora you will have
to sacrifice some of your time and effort to get it working like you want. There's no
way back or out of KDE 4 in Fedora 9 or higher via Fedora Developers. There are many good
things :) and there are some things that need to be worked on :(, if you are loyal to KDE,
you will use it, otherwise move to gnome/xfce/____,. There is not much we can do here, I
want the digital clock back, will I get to see it? I do not know, I wish the developers
consider bringing it back, but it is not a perfect world and one gets what we pay for.
Regards,
Antonio
7:24 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Tom Horsley <tom.horsley <at> att.net> writes:
That depends, maybe RedHat thinks it would be a good thing if they
didn't have to fool with KDE anymore .
Oh no, not that conspiracy theory again!
The only RH people involved with the decision to ship KDE 4 as the KDE desktop
from Fedora 9 on were the 2 KDE maintainers, and they did not take that
decision alone, it was done by all the KDE comaintainers, including the
community ones. We have no secret agenda to kill KDE, quite the opposite! (Just
ask those who have been involved in discussions with me about the role of KDE
in Fedora. I'm the one who always complains when KDE doesn't get equal
treatment with GNOME.) None of the people you suspect of trying to kill KDE
were involved in the decision to ship KDE 4 (and only KDE 4) in any way.
Kevin Kofler
7:06 p.m.
New subject: [OT] Are security updates necessary?
On Sat June 14 2008 16:37:11 Antonio Olivares wrote:
I have run old version of KDE 3.1 from Mandrake 9.1 gotten on
internet, no
single update whatsoever, and I have been safe. So it can be done, do you
mean other updates, that can be critical, with apps and not the desktop
here.
Some people manage to walk through a minefield without being blown up.
They were lucky, but not safe.
Security bugs have been fixed in web browsing, email, firewalls,
displaying pictures, viewing pdfs, and opening documents. Without
those fixes your system may not have been compromised (but how to
be certain, eh?) but you certainly would not have been safe.
Meanwhile, back at the KDE ranch ...
--Mike Bird
6:59 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
--- On Sat, 6/14/08, Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net> wrote:
There is reason to hope that in a couple of years KDE 4.x
will be better
than KDE 3.5, but for now KDE 4.x is unproductive for most
users.
Distros that don't provide KDE 3.5 for their KDE users
while KDE 4.x is
being developed will simply lose most of their KDE users.
Why would they lose their users?
They can create 3.5.X packages that will continue to work, Question is who is going to
step up to the plate and deliver KDE 3.5.X packages for Fedora?
Are you willing to give some of your time to make this a reality?
Remember you can remove all of KDE 4.X from Fedora and build KDE 3.5.9 from source and no
one should stop you from doing that. There is no way that you can have the cake and eat
it too! :)
That is not a
good thing for Fedora and that is not a good thing for Red
Hat. And there
are things I'd rather be doing than migrating a bunch
of installations to
some other distro.
Kubuntu has two versions, one with KDE 4.0 and one with KDE 3.5.9, Debian will
include KDE 4.X in testing and will not force it onto their users
http://ekaia.org/blog/2008/06/08/lets-go-for-kde-359-in-lenny/
There will always be CentOS, Scientific Linux, other RHEL clones. The kernel exuse is not
a good one, you can compile your own kernel and move forward. You want the latest and
greatest except for KDE and not have to work at it, is not possible.
Regards,
Antonio
--Mike Bird
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list(a)redhat.com
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
6:48 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
--- On Sat, 6/14/08, Tom Horsley <tom.horsley(a)att.net> wrote:
From: Tom Horsley <tom.horsley(a)att.net>
Subject: Re: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
To: fedora-list(a)redhat.com
Date: Saturday, June 14, 2008, 3:56 PM
On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 14:58:10 -0700
Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net> wrote:
> Distros that don't provide KDE 3.5 for their KDE
users while KDE 4.x is
> being developed will simply lose most of their KDE
users. That is not a
> good thing for Fedora and that is not a good thing for
Red Hat.
This is why Red Hat does not push out KDE 4.0 unto their corporate desktop
customers. They know better :) If they did, then I can just see the complaints.
That depends, maybe RedHat thinks it would be a good thing
if they
didn't have to fool with KDE anymore :-).
I keep getting closer and closer to the point where
learning enough
about gentoo to switch to it and customize it out the wazoo
is
seeming more and more attractive (except that previous
gentoo dabbling
showed me just how much work that would be).
There are too many complaints against Gentoo on Distrowatch
http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20080609&mode=67#comments
Don't let that discourage you though. :)
If it works like FreeBSD, then it is supposed to be good since it is based off the ports
system, ports/portage. Things take time to build, but when they are done you are ready
for some real work :). I've tried Sabayon Live DVD which is based on Gentoo and it
worked well in my opinion.
Regards,
Antonio
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list(a)redhat.com
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
6:38 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 14:58 -0700, Mike Bird wrote:
There is reason to hope that in a couple of years KDE 4.x will be
better
than KDE 3.5, but for now KDE 4.x is unproductive for most users.
Granted there are some problems with KDE 4, but do you have any data to
support your assertion that it's unproductive for *most* users? I've
found I can do pretty much anything I commonly need to do, just that
it's different from 3.5.
poc
6:37 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
--- On Sat, 6/14/08, Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net> wrote:
From: Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net>
Subject: Re: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
To: fedora-list(a)redhat.com
Date: Saturday, June 14, 2008, 3:48 PM
On Sat June 14 2008 15:31:04 Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> Why not use the version of Fedora that last has KDE
3.5 if this is
> such a big deal for you?
You seem to be looping Arthur. F8 security updates end in
about six months and no, you're not safe without them.
--Mike Bird
--
How do you define safe?
I have run old version of KDE 3.1 from Mandrake 9.1 gotten on internet, no single update
whatsoever, and I have been safe. So it can be done, do you mean other updates, that can
be critical, with apps and not the desktop here.
Regards,
Antonio
5:31 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 4:58 PM, Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net> wrote:
On Sat June 14 2008 14:21:29 Antonio Olivares wrote:
> stay here and write many, many bug reports, rally the troops in hopes of
> making KDE 4.X the best KDE that is possible, take the positives the good
> things and try to turn your face to bad things, the things you do not like
> about KDE. In all the bad, there has to be something good. Okular is very
> good. Evince is also. I can use either or to view multiple document
> formats, ie., dvi, pdf, ps, etc. . Let the battle to which desktop in
> Fedora 9 or higher begin, which one earns your respect and choice after
> all, you can make other statements that can make more impact.
There is reason to hope that in a couple of years KDE 4.x will be better
than KDE 3.5, but for now KDE 4.x is unproductive for most users.
Distros that don't provide KDE 3.5 for their KDE users while KDE 4.x is
being developed will simply lose most of their KDE users. That is not a
good thing for Fedora and that is not a good thing for Red Hat. And there
are things I'd rather be doing than migrating a bunch of installations to
some other distro.
--Mike Bird
Why not use the version of Fedora that last has KDE 3.5 if this is
such a big deal for you?
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
4:58 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat June 14 2008 14:21:29 Antonio Olivares wrote:
stay here and write many, many bug reports, rally the troops in hopes
of
making KDE 4.X the best KDE that is possible, take the positives the good
things and try to turn your face to bad things, the things you do not like
about KDE. In all the bad, there has to be something good. Okular is very
good. Evince is also. I can use either or to view multiple document
formats, ie., dvi, pdf, ps, etc. . Let the battle to which desktop in
Fedora 9 or higher begin, which one earns your respect and choice after
all, you can make other statements that can make more impact.
There is reason to hope that in a couple of years KDE 4.x will be better
than KDE 3.5, but for now KDE 4.x is unproductive for most users.
Distros that don't provide KDE 3.5 for their KDE users while KDE 4.x is
being developed will simply lose most of their KDE users. That is not a
good thing for Fedora and that is not a good thing for Red Hat. And there
are things I'd rather be doing than migrating a bunch of installations to
some other distro.
--Mike Bird
4:21 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
--- On Sat, 6/14/08, linuxguy <linuxguy123(a)gmail.com> wrote:
From: linuxguy <linuxguy123(a)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
To: "For users of Fedora" <fedora-list(a)redhat.com>
Date: Saturday, June 14, 2008, 2:03 PM
On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 09:38 -0700, Mike Bird wrote:
> QUESTION TO DEVELOPERS: Is there any hope of a full
KDE 3.5
> in F10, plus an upgrade path from F8 to F10 that
preserves
> KDE 3.5 configurations?
>
> KDE 4.0 is incomplete and not suitable for most users.
I totally agree ! I was going to post about this but I
didn't want to
upset the group. But its true ! F9 is the WORST
RH/Fedora release I
have ever used and I've been doing this since RH8.
You know the answer :(. If you do not ...., use Gnome, Xfce, ______, put your
Desktop choice here, or run ______ distro that uses KDE 3.5.X.
I want KDE 3.5 back for F10.
Unfortunately we won't see it happen unless hell freezes over :(
And don't give me the crap that Fedora is bleeding edge
software. F9
is beyond bleeding, its suicidal.
I wont tell you what you already know. We can jump up and down on this and it
won't happen. We have choices, good thing you can use other desktop environment, use
older version of Fedora or move to another distro.
or you can
stay here and write many, many bug reports, rally the troops in hopes of making KDE 4.X
the best KDE that is possible, take the positives the good things and try to turn your
face to bad things, the things you do not like about KDE. In all the bad, there has to be
something good. Okular is very good. Evince is also. I can use either or to view
multiple document formats, ie., dvi, pdf, ps, etc. . Let the battle to which desktop in
Fedora 9 or higher begin, which one earns your respect and choice after all, you can make
other statements that can make more impact.
Regards,
Antonio
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list(a)redhat.com
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
4:09 p.m.
--- On Sat, 6/14/08, Antonio Olivares <olivares14031(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Antonio Olivares <olivares14031(a)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10?
To: "For users of Fedora" <fedora-list(a)redhat.com>
Date: Saturday, June 14, 2008, 2:01 PM
--- On Sat, 6/14/08, Rex Dieter <rdieter(a)math.unl.edu>
wrote:
> From: Rex Dieter <rdieter(a)math.unl.edu>
> Subject: Re: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10?
> To: fedora-list(a)redhat.com
> Date: Saturday, June 14, 2008, 12:25 PM
> Mike Bird wrote:
>
> > QUESTION TO DEVELOPERS: Is there any hope of a
full
> KDE 3.5
> > in F10, plus an upgrade path from F8 to F10 that
> preserves
> > KDE 3.5 configurations?
>
> Fedora 9+ is pretty much comitted to kde 4 now, so
short
> answer is no.
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE/KDE4FAQ
> The way forward is to help make kde4 better. and/or
stick
> with f8/kde3 or rhel5/kde3 (if you want something
beyond
> f8's lifetime).
>
> -- Rex
>
> --
I knew this all along, but I still have a question.
Is there any hope of getting the digital clock in KDE 4.X
that looked and worked beautifully in KDE 3.5.X?
The new KDE clock does not impress me :(
I even wanted to look for KDE-Look to get the digital clock
in Gnome, but I cannot find any places where to find the
code. I can compile it, I do not care if an rpm exists or
not :)
I would like to rally KDE fans across to ask for the
Digital clock. The new clock works but is not what many
users used to KDE 3.5.X like.
Otherwise, to run KDE 3.5.X and still run Fedora will be
Fedora 8/7 or LiveCD that does not get any updates.
Regards,
Antonio
--
Here's where the clock issue is discussed.
http://dot.kde.org/1197405276/1197451648/
Regards,
Antonio
4:03 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 09:38 -0700, Mike Bird wrote:
QUESTION TO DEVELOPERS: Is there any hope of a full KDE 3.5
in F10, plus an upgrade path from F8 to F10 that preserves
KDE 3.5 configurations?
KDE 4.0 is incomplete and not suitable for most users.
I totally agree ! I was going to post about this but I didn't want to
upset the group. But its true ! F9 is the WORST RH/Fedora release I
have ever used and I've been doing this since RH8.
I want KDE 3.5 back for F10.
And don't give me the crap that Fedora is bleeding edge software. F9
is beyond bleeding, its suicidal.
4:01 p.m.
--- On Sat, 6/14/08, Rex Dieter <rdieter(a)math.unl.edu> wrote:
From: Rex Dieter <rdieter(a)math.unl.edu>
Subject: Re: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10?
To: fedora-list(a)redhat.com
Date: Saturday, June 14, 2008, 12:25 PM
Mike Bird wrote:
> QUESTION TO DEVELOPERS: Is there any hope of a full
KDE 3.5
> in F10, plus an upgrade path from F8 to F10 that
preserves
> KDE 3.5 configurations?
Fedora 9+ is pretty much comitted to kde 4 now, so short
answer is no.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE/KDE4FAQ
The way forward is to help make kde4 better. and/or stick
with f8/kde3 or rhel5/kde3 (if you want something beyond
f8's lifetime).
-- Rex
--
I knew this all along, but I still have a question.
Is there any hope of getting the digital clock in KDE 4.X that looked and worked
beautifully in KDE 3.5.X?
The new KDE clock does not impress me :(
I even wanted to look for KDE-Look to get the digital clock in Gnome, but I cannot find
any places where to find the code. I can compile it, I do not care if an rpm exists or
not :)
I would like to rally KDE fans across to ask for the Digital clock. The new clock works
but is not what many users used to KDE 3.5.X like.
Otherwise, to run KDE 3.5.X and still run Fedora will be Fedora 8/7 or LiveCD that does
not get any updates.
Regards,
Antonio
3:16 p.m.
On Sat June 14 2008 12:17:46 Joonas Sarajärvi wrote:
If you really want to keep using the old KDE, I'd suggest
using CentOS or Debian. Both of them still have a few years
of supported packages for KDE 3.
According to DistroWatch, CentOS is only up to kernel 2.6.18
which rules it out for newer desktops and laptops. We've
tested Debian Lenny and it works if you don't mind spending
a lot of time keeping a mix of Testing and Unstable up to date
until Lenny is released.
Haven't tried Ubuntu Hardy LTS but that's on the to-do list as
Distrowatch says it has KDE 3.5.9 with kernel 2.6.24 which is
just about perfect. However, tests of some of the earlier
versions of Ubuntu left me wishing that they wouldn't mess so
much with the way that standard programs work.
Of course there's still a good six months of F8 KDE 3.5 left
but we have to develop a contingency plan in case F10 is really
going to be stuck with KDE 4.x.
--Mike Bird
2:17 p.m.
Hi
I'm not a developer, but would like to comment a bit.
2008/6/14 Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net>:
QUESTION TO DEVELOPERS: Is there any hope of a full KDE 3.5
in F10, plus an upgrade path from F8 to F10 that preserves
KDE 3.5 configurations?
I think this is unlikely. Are you willing to do the work needed to
maintain all the KDE 3 packages? But this is just me guessing,
maybe there are actually people interested in doing what you
are suggesting.
2008/6/14 Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net>:
KDE 4.0 is incomplete and not suitable for most users.
KDE 4.1 will be incomplete and not suitable for most users.
Software is rarely complete, but I find even KDE 4.0 very usable,
though far from perfect. I use it daily on my laptop, doing all the
same things that I usually do on computers. My desktop still
has Fedora 8 and Gnome, but it will get Fedora 9 with KDE 4
at some point.
2008/6/14 Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net>:
The KDE devels are debating whether KDE 4.2 will be usable.
The pro-plasma crowd argue that it is theoretically possible
to implement a desktop by KDE 4.2, but that everyone should
change to using the folderview and forget about real desktops.
What has being forced to have the $HOME/Desktop files as icons
on the background have to do with real desktops? Why is it
better to have that than just be able to set the desktop to behave
that way if one actually wants it? The new system even allows you
to just select a specific region of the desktop for file icons, so you
can some other stuff somewhere else. Or whatever you want.
2008/6/14 Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net>:
Probably control center will be fixed by KDE 4.2. It's
debatable whether Dolphin will ever have the usability that
KDE 3.5 Konqueror had, but if it does it won't be until KDE 4.2
at the earliest.
I find Dolphin to be actually much better for file management
than any Konqueror version I have ever tried. It's probably
just a matter of preference.
2008/6/14 Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net>:
F9 already includes a usable KMenu to replace
the KDE 4.0 joke, although the usable KMenu is not the default.
I think the new menu is great. I usually don't want to browser for
the application I am looking for in nested menus. The new menu
lets me just type a few letters and have me launch the program
instantly, of use the favorites feature. The new menu certainly
isn't a joke, it's just different. You can use the old style menu if
you want.
2008/6/14 Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net>:
I'm not a KDE developer but I do have users that need to get
work done and they are not interested in a religious conversion
to plasmoids. After reading a lot of KDE developer discussions
my best guess is that KDE 4.3 is the earliest possibility for
most KDE users, but no guarantees.
There is nothing religious about the plasmoids. The KDE devs
were just tired of maintaining the old crufty KDE 3 desktop
pieces and wanted to create a new, more flexible system.
I wrote this to note that there are also users who like the
new KDE 4 desktop, and that the work that is being put into
it is appreciated a lot.
I'd guess KDE 4 will never work exactly like KDE 3, which
seems to be the way you want it to work. Maybe the KDE 3
desktop will be gone from Fedora in six months. The KDE 3
libraries will probably stay a little longer.
If you really want to keep using the old KDE, I'd suggest
using CentOS or Debian. Both of them still have a few years
of supported packages for KDE 3.
--
Joonas Sarajärvi
muepsj(a)gmail.com
1:43 p.m.
New subject: [OT] Are security updates necessary?
--- On Sat, 6/14/08, Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net> wrote:
From: Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net>
Subject: [OT] Are security updates necessary?
To: fedora-list(a)redhat.com
Date: Saturday, June 14, 2008, 11:18 AM
On Sat June 14 2008 10:29:48 Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 12:25 PM, Mike Bird
<mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net> wrote:
> > I'm writing this in F8 after reverting back
from F9 due to KDE 4.0, but
> > IIRC security updates for F8 end in six months
and security updates for
> > F7 just ended.
>
> Yah... don't use your machine on the public
internet, don't use
> unnecessary services, you'll be fine.
Provided you also don't browse the web, read emails, or
accept
documents from others, then maybe you don't need
security updates.
I still have a few FC3 servers behind multiple layers of
firewalls
but in general I wouldn't recommend living without
security updates.
However the thread topic is whether we can hope to see KDE
3.5 in F10.
--Mike Bird
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list(a)redhat.com
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
I am not a developer, I am just a regular user, but I do not see it happening. A good
idea would be to make a KDE 3.5.10 after KDE 3.5.9 to continue with KDE 3.5.X series, but
it won't happen :(
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/10/Schedule
If you want KDE 3.5.X, and still use Fedora you can use Fedora 9-X where X is a number
less than 8, or a LiveCD which does not care for any updates, and you can still run and
start without problems/updates/etc.
Regards,
Antonio
1:18 p.m.
New subject: [OT] Are security updates necessary?
On Sat June 14 2008 10:29:48 Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 12:25 PM, Mike Bird
<mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net> wrote:
> I'm writing this in F8 after reverting back from F9 due to KDE 4.0, but
> IIRC security updates for F8 end in six months and security updates for
> F7 just ended.
Yah... don't use your machine on the public internet, don't use
unnecessary services, you'll be fine.
Provided you also don't browse the web, read emails, or accept
documents from others, then maybe you don't need security updates.
I still have a few FC3 servers behind multiple layers of firewalls
but in general I wouldn't recommend living without security updates.
However the thread topic is whether we can hope to see KDE 3.5 in F10.
--Mike Bird
12:29 p.m.
On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 12:25 PM, Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net> wrote:
On Sat June 14 2008 10:18:58 Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 11:38 AM, Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net> wrote:
> Any reason not to use F8? I still have F7 on my desktop.. works just fine.
I'm writing this in F8 after reverting back from F9 due to KDE 4.0, but
IIRC security updates for F8 end in six months and security updates for
F7 just ended.
Yah... don't use your machine on the public internet, don't use
unnecessary services, you'll be fine.
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
12:25 p.m.
On Sat June 14 2008 10:18:58 Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 11:38 AM, Mike Bird
<mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net> wrote:
Any reason not to use F8? I still have F7 on my desktop.. works just fine.
I'm writing this in F8 after reverting back from F9 due to KDE 4.0, but
IIRC security updates for F8 end in six months and security updates for
F7 just ended.
--Mike Bird
12:05 p.m.
Em Sábado 14 Junho 2008, Mike Bird escreveu:
QUESTION TO DEVELOPERS: Is there any hope of a full KDE 3.5
in F10, plus an upgrade path from F8 to F10 that preserves
KDE 3.5 configurations?
KDE 4.0 is incomplete and not suitable for most users.
KDE 4.1 will be incomplete and not suitable for most users.
The KDE devels are debating whether KDE 4.2 will be usable.
The pro-plasma crowd argue that it is theoretically possible
to implement a desktop by KDE 4.2, but that everyone should
change to using the folderview and forget about real desktops.
Probably control center will be fixed by KDE 4.2. It's
debatable whether Dolphin will ever have the usability that
KDE 3.5 Konqueror had, but if it does it won't be until KDE 4.2
at the earliest. F9 already includes a usable KMenu to replace
the KDE 4.0 joke, although the usable KMenu is not the default.
I'm not a KDE developer but I do have users that need to get
work done and they are not interested in a religious conversion
to plasmoids. After reading a lot of KDE developer discussions
my best guess is that KDE 4.3 is the earliest possibility for
most KDE users, but no guarantees.
This puts us in something of a quandary. F9 KDE 4.0 is hugely
annoying to most KDE users. F8 KDE 3.5 still works fine of
course but IIRC security updates will end in six months.
QUESTION TO DEVELOPERS: Is there any hope of a full KDE 3.5
in F10, plus an upgrade path from F8 to F10 that preserves
KDE 3.5 configurations?
Hard as it is to say, I must agree with you in regard to current KDE
4.x. Too many bugs and too many missing features, applications and
configuration options. I've lost track of how many bugs I opened or
added info to and still have many more documented here to open. Most of
them about very basic things.
I'm a big fan of KDE for years, but I'm really missing my old (but
working) KDE 3.5.x. I hate to say all that, not only because I like KDE
very much, but because I'm aware of the huge amount of work done by the
developers. I think KDE 4 will be a very good desktop environment when
it's ready, but it's not ready at its current state and should not have
been released so early, I think.
The way it is now, it causes a bad first impression in novice users and
disappoint the old and experienced ones.
Too sad...
[]'s
Marcelo
7:44 p.m.
Mike Bird <mgb-fedora <at> yosemite.net> writes:
QUESTION TO DEVELOPERS: Is there any hope of a full KDE 3.5
in F10, plus an upgrade path from F8 to F10 that preserves
KDE 3.5 configurations?
And a pony too? ;-)
No, versions in Fedora normally move forward, not backwards, and KDE will be no
exception.
KDE 4.0 is incomplete and not suitable for most users.
Not true, it is completely usable.
KDE 4.1 will be incomplete and not suitable for most users.
Even less true.
The KDE devels are debating whether KDE 4.2 will be usable.
That's not true, many of them are already running 4.0 or 4.1 beta, and
especially 4.1 is widely reported to be perfectly usable.
The pro-plasma crowd argue that it is theoretically possible
to implement a desktop by KDE 4.2, but that everyone should
change to using the folderview and forget about real desktops.
The folderview _is_ a real desktop, it will even be set to display ~/Desktop by
default.
Probably control center will be fixed by KDE 4.2.
"Fixed" how? It already works fine.
It's debatable whether Dolphin will ever have the usability that
KDE 3.5 Konqueror had, but if it does it won't be until KDE 4.2
at the earliest.
That's just not true. Both Dolphin and the embedded DolphinPart in Konqueror
work just fine. Your complaint is also way too vague, you aren't saying what
the usability problems you encountered are.
F9 already includes a usable KMenu to replace the KDE 4.0 joke,
although the usable KMenu is not the default.
Well, some people actually like the new Kickoff menu. (For example, we had a
vote among KDE maintainers for the default menu, it ended up 3-2 for the new
one.) And if (like me) you don't like the new menu, the old one is just 2
clicks away, so this is really the wrong thing to complain about.
I'm not a KDE developer but I do have users that need to get
work done and they are not interested in a religious conversion
to plasmoids. After reading a lot of KDE developer discussions
my best guess is that KDE 4.3 is the earliest possibility for
most KDE users, but no guarantees.
I think the KDE 4.1.x in F10 will be something rock solid for your users. IMHO
the most annoying issue in F9 is the GTK+ systray icon problem (actually mostly
harmless in practice, just annoying and ugly), which is being worked on
upstream right now, so I expect that we'll be able to fix it in an F9 update a
few days from now, and F10 will almost certainly not ship with that bug. Trust
me, we know what the prime annoyances are and we're scrambling to get them
fixed ASAP, just as we got the real showstoppers fixed before the F9 release.
This puts us in something of a quandary. F9 KDE 4.0 is hugely
annoying to most KDE users. F8 KDE 3.5 still works fine of
course but IIRC security updates will end in six months.
Don't panic. Our KDE 4 will improve a lot in those 6 months. We're already
working on 4.1 in Rawhide, and we're planning to push it to Fedora 9 once the
final 4.1.0 is released. Fedora 10 will ship with a later 4.1.x version, which
means even more bugfixes.
QUESTION TO DEVELOPERS: Is there any hope of a full KDE 3.5
in F10, plus an upgrade path from F8 to F10 that preserves
KDE 3.5 configurations?
No. There is hope of a fully-usable KDE 4.1.x, and of 4.2.x as an update.
Kevin Kofler
9:35 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 3:12 AM, Andrew Kelly <akelly(a)corisweb.org> wrote:
On Mon, 2008-06-16 at 12:17 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 4:07 AM, Andrew Kelly <akelly(a)corisweb.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 15:03 -0600, linuxguy wrote:
> >> On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 09:38 -0700, Mike Bird wrote:
> >> > QUESTION TO DEVELOPERS: Is there any hope of a full KDE 3.5
> >> > in F10, plus an upgrade path from F8 to F10 that preserves
> >> > KDE 3.5 configurations?
> >> >
> >> > KDE 4.0 is incomplete and not suitable for most users.
> >>
> >>
> >> I totally agree ! I was going to post about this but I didn't want to
> >> upset the group. But its true ! F9 is the WORST RH/Fedora release I
> >> have ever used and I've been doing this since RH8.
> >>
> >> I want KDE 3.5 back for F10.
> >>
> >> And don't give me the crap that Fedora is bleeding edge software. F9
> >> is beyond bleeding, its suicidal.
> >>
> >
> > F10 will be out before you know it, and F8 still gets dozens of updates
> > a week. I still can't get that to sit well with me. Are things being
> > accelerated to the point of there being 5 Fedora releases for each RHEL
> > release? Or is EL re-tooling for annual releases, maybe?
> >
> > Andy
>
> Has anything change? Doesn't Fedora still follow it's original 6 month
> release cycle?
Yeah, guess you're right, Arthur. Sure feels quicker to me lately,
though. Don't know why.
Mebbe it's just my brain slowing down.
According to the last announcement made about the releases (public announcement)
A month (or a few weeks) were skipped to get back on track with
schedule. I can't remember the details. So last release cycle was
likely less than exactly 6 months.
When is RHEL 6 supposed to release?
I don't know.
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
2:41 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
[Tim wrote about sound mixing]
Patrick O'Callaghan:
> Totally agree with this. It's hard enough even figuring out
what the
> various mixer controls even control.
David Boles:
It is a choice. If you, either of you, do not like it you should
disable it.
But I seriously doubt that Pulseaudio will 'just go away' because you don't
like it. ;-)
What I wrote was less about pulse audio, per se, but the whole idea of
sound mixing, with or without it. Pulse audio gives you individual
volume levels, but really they're controlled from the wrong place. Alsa
is somewhat similar.
I see the value of being able to call up a mixer, and adjust levels.
But let that be a remote. So if you adjust volume on your CD player,
it's the *same* as adjusting it on the mixer (not two interactive
controls - have the same control in two places). Pulse audio comes into
it's own when you do something like turn the sound down on your ogg
player, and only the ogg player, you don't adjust all the PCM devices,
or screw around with the master control. But, again, the volume control
on the player should be the *same* control that you get to play with on
the mixer panel.
And quite why we have two messily interdependent volume control mixer
thingoes is beyond me (on Gnome, at least). We have the volume control
thing, that we've been used to over the last few years, plus the pulse
audio volume controller. And both need playing with to hear sound.
Which is made all the more harder by pulse audio's controls disappearing
and appearing, depending on whether your audio software is currently
playing, or not.
And going back to something I touched on in my original message, the
average set of system annunciators are stupidly created, anyway. Yes,
you probably do want a loud "red alert" sound file for big warnings and
emergencies. But you want much softer dings and beeps for things like
incoming messages, and "okay" responses.
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.25.6-55.fc9.i686
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.
2:25 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 22:18 -0400, David Boles wrote:
Ric Moore wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 05:56 +0000, g wrote:
>
> It might be better to avoid the use of "labels" as much as possible. I
> know it's hard to do in practice. Sadly, I have my share of favorites.
> "Idiot" just rolls off the fingers when typing it. So does
"Twit".
> That's a really good one. "Stupid" gets my hackles up though,
I'll
> battle on that one. <cackles>
>
> Again, it's better to not use them at all. Ric
A sensible person would run CentOS, or RHEL, or one of the many others, for a
server. It would be foolish to run any distro, such as Fedora, there are many
others, in a production type situation. Something that changes as often, as
quickly, and a radically as Fedora does not, would not, be a good choice for a
stable LAN or production system. Only if you want to be cheap and get 'the
free stuff' would it make sense. And then 'they' would have to deal with the
problems.
So tell me Ric. What would you call someone that would do this, described
above? Bob? Fred? Or a fool?
Well, there is an alternative reason, like mine. I've been using RedHat
since the living room days with a pile of floppies and later a CD! to
install from. Got a job at RedHat even. I know Bob Young quite well. So,
there is some emotional/intellectual "attachment" to Fedora as it sorta
replaced what was the cheap-seats box set. It was a stab in the heart to
have that part of RedHat closed down, not long after Bob left. So, I'm
sure that some, like me, hoped that Fedora would become the community
that replaced the box sets and would have SOME sane margin of
stability.
It absolutely KILLS me to have to switch. But, the only way through to
Acceptance is to experience the first four of the five stages of grief,
Denial, Anger, Bargaining, and Depression. I've done that finally by
giving up and receiving Acceptance. <whew!> It's been hard on me. It's
like another divorce. I've already had 3 1/2 of those. Some of my
colleagues are using Ubuntu Hardy Heron, which the Wonderland devel
folks use, and they have zero problems getting X11 apps to run. Xvfb
works there and not here, for whatever Wonderland does with it. That was
the last straw.
I bargained asking for help here, got zip. Fsck it. I'm not getting
younger and 2.7 million potential clients is nothing to sneeze at.
Finally got the funds for the satellite from our Non-Profit and it's on
order tomorrow. I'll give CentOS a shot, but if I have the same problems
it'll be a goner quickly ... like within minutes. Then I'll be done with
the rpm world for good. Sad day, end of a personal era. I sure haven't
arrived here easily. I had hoped to pay forward the good that people
like Bob Young had done for me and introduce RedHat to a bunch of state
DOC sites. To assist the Debian folks instead sticks in my craw ...lot's
of old baggage there from the Old Days. Plus another learning curve
added to the learning curves I've already put myself into. I see no
other way to end the pain it's caused. Does that make me foolish?? No,
just trying to do what I considered the "Right Thing".
To me it makes no sense whatsoever, to stride boldly ahead with the
newest when there is so much breaking behind. THAT is foolish, IMHO.
Others have noted the same thing and have been vocal about it.
Pulseaudio is a case in point. Some have no problems with it, some find
it impossible. Freeze things until it works for the largest amount of
folks. Same with Xorg. That would be functional to have some actual
concerns for the lowest common denominator of user.
To me "Community" denotes Extended Family. A Functional Family lives to
meet the needs of its "Children". In a Dysfunctional Family, the
Children live to meet the needs of the Parents. Please, do not call
this a "community" when the avowed goals are that the children (users)
meet the needs of the parents (RedHat). Please call it something other
than a community. It's misleading and harmful. If someone wants to raise
hell over my observation, fine. But, remember the first stage of Grief
is "Denial". Print this out, run it by a shrink and see what he sees in
what I have written. I'm doing a "Stop-Switch" and seeking better
parents. I'll always be grateful and in Gift-Debt forever to Bob Young.
I'll just have to find another way to repay the debt. Ric
--
----------------------------------------------------
My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
Linux user# 44256 Sign up at: http://counter.li.org/
http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/oar
https://oar.dev.java.net/
Verizon Cell # 336-254-1339
-----------------------------------------------------
12:43 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 13:50 -0300, Marcelo Magno T. Sales wrote:
Em Sábado 21 Junho 2008, Patrick O'Callaghan escreveu:
> On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 16:15 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> > Isn't ctrl-alt-backspace meant to kill X, rather than shutdown?
> > (I could be wrong as I never use it.)
>
> Ctrl-Alt-Backspace kills the X server. It's not clear to me whether
> there is any practical difference between doing that and hitting a
> "log out" button. Presumably the latter could give the various apps
> time to clean up, but I'm not sure if it actually does this.
Logging out closes only the desktop environment you were using and the
applications that were running in it. CTRL+ALT+BS kills X and the
graphical login manager too, so it re-reads the xorg.conf file (if you
have altered it, this is needed), reload video drivers (if you have
updated it, this is needed) and reload the xdm/gdm/kdm configuration,
among other things that are not done if you simply log out.
AFAIK the display manager (kdm, gdm, whatever) does *not* die, neither
when you log out nor when you kill X. This is easy to verify: just check
the PID of kdm or gdm, log out, switch to a virtual console and check
the PID again. You'll find that it hasn't changed (I've done this with
kdm, I'm assuming gdm is the same). That's because it's the parent
process of the X server. This matters because if something like kdelibs
changes due to an update I want to be sure of not leaving old versions
lying around. The easiest way to to do this is "init 3; init 5" from a
virtual console.
Also, logging out now also tells the display manager to restart the X
server (it didn't used to).
Which is why I was wondering if there was in practice a difference
between the "log out" button and Ctrl-Alt-Backspace.
poc
5:27 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 14:36 -0400, David Boles wrote:
> Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
>> On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 02:40 +0930, Tim wrote:
>>
>> Totally agree with this. It's hard enough even figuring out what the
>> various mixer controls even control.
>
> It is a choice. If you, either of you, do not like it you should disable it.
> But I seriously doubt that Pulseaudio will 'just go away' because you
don't
> like it. ;-)
You misunderstand me. It's not that I dislike PA, I dislike *all* the
sound systems on Linux because I don't understand them and have never
seen a clear explanation of how they all fit together and what they do.
It seems to me (and it isn't the first time I've made the point) that
there's a gaping hole where a unified model should be. Maybe I'm just
stupid but I seem to see a lot of different models with overlapping
functionality and no clear relation between them. And every time someone
comes up with a new architecture (like PA) we have N+1 systems where
previously we had N.
In fact the mixer issue isn't even related to PA since I use Kmix.
I think that we are misunderstanding each other. :-)
What Is PulseAudio?
PulseAudio is a sound server for POSIX and Win32 systems. A sound server is
basically a proxy for your sound applications. It allows you to do advanced
operations on your sound data as it passes between your application and your
hardware. Things like transferring the audio to a different machine, changing
the sample format or channel count and mixing several sounds into one are
easily achieved using a sound server.
As for the sound applications? Each is the same thing with a different look
and feel. As are, for example, your favorite CD burning program and mine which
is different looking. All the GUI's do is make the command line entries for
you with 'point an click' stuff.
The problem with sound being, IMO, that some work 'here' and don't 'work
there'. And with all of that you have the 'buy me' codecs too. Which, it
appears, is the main cause of the 'sound stopped/does not' work problems.
I can feel the pain that some have with their installs. But (knock wood) I
have no had a Linux related problem since I trashed the ZIP Drive many years
ago. I get bumps and hiccups from time to time but nothing like I read here.
Which makes me wonder... hardware or PEBCAK? ;-)
--
David
10:30 a.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 15:57 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Anne Wilson wrote:
> LDAP does feel a bit daunting. I feel that it should be possible to learn
> and activate one bit of its potential at a time, but after reading a
> couple of
> web pages about it I gave up. Does the book you mention lead you in
> reasonably slowly? I've rather a lot on my plate for the forseeable
> future, so don't want to have to swallow huge amounts of medicine at once
My view of LDAP is slightly jaundiced.
I've come to the conclusion that it is a very bad way
of creating a system-wide address book,
but unfortunately the only way that actually works.
(As Winston Churchill said of democracy,
it is a terrible system but better than all the others
that have been tried from time to time.)
I have the Gerald Carter book (actually I borrowed it)
and I would give it 7/10, or alpha minus.
I was amazed when looking around how bad all the online introductions
on OpenLDAP that I found were.
(If I have to read another history of X509 I may jump out of the window.)
Certainly Carter's book is far better than any of these.
It still seems to me that there ought to be a simple 10-page exposition
on OpenLDAP, but if there is I haven't found it.
----
here's the thing...LDAP is an erector set that was originally created
(X509) to do something entirely different than what most people use it
for today.
The OpenLDAP developers are only concerned with the mechanics of
OpenLDAP software and not interested in providing tutorials about LDAP
itself. Their audience is typically the very skilled system
administrator who is capable of compiling software (high level compile
including linking), and already knowledgeable about things like sasl,
kerberos and authentication mechanisms.
For the record, OpenLDAP administrator's guide is here...
http://www.openldap.org/doc/admin24/ # version 2.4.x
http://www.openldap.org/doc/admin23/ # version 2.3.x
The various online instructions aren't 'bad', but rather confusing to
someone that doesn't understand LDAP because one persons tutorial will
vary from another and there really is no set way to do anything on
LDAP...it is after all an erector set.
Fedora Directory Server is a bit simpler for newbies in that out of the
box, it has pre-conceived notions of users and groups, certificates,
ACL's/ACI's and has some web/gui based consoles to get you started but
still, it doesn't supplant knowledge and some of the twists like
importing ldap.schema's can be daunting.
There cannot be a simple 10-page exposition on OpenLDAP because that
simple exposition pre-supposes what you intend to do with your erector
set. In fact, the above mentioned OpenLDAP administrator's guide is over
20 pages and it only covers how to 'use' the software but does not cover
any specific projects to build with your erector set.
Craig
7:33 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Rex Dieter <rdieter <at> math.unl.edu> writes:
Time commitment would likely be proportional to your expections of
quality
and continuing support. To do well, and if *I* were doing it, my estimations
would be at least ~6 hours up front, including pkg builds, hosting,
deployment, plus who know how much extra time/effort for onging support and
bugfixes.
I think that's very optimistic. I'd expect the successful builds alone to take
at least 2 days; adding all the specfile editing and fixing, that would be at
least a week of work. The edits are nontrivial, for example one has to bump the
Epoch (or change the Name) everywhere so the packages don't get replaced by the
KDE 4 version in the F9 repo, and then adjust the other packages to refer to
the correct Name or Epoch. It's easier to backport a new version to an old
distro (like you are doing for kde-redhat unstable) than to forward-port an old
version to a new distro, due to how RPM works.
To do the work properly (and here we are at your "expectations of quality"
point), one also has to track down the stuff which depends on KDE (not just
kdelibs, but e.g. kdebase(-workspace)) and rebuild it for KDE 3, possibly
undoing the changes done in F9 to make it use KDE 4. For example compiz. That's
potentially weeks of work, also counting the time needed to track down all the
stuff which has to be reverted. If that is not done, then some packages (like
compiz) will not be usable with those KDE 3 packages.
All in all it would be a colossal effort, probably ending up with an
unsupportable mix of Fedora 8 and 9, and with a target audience much less
tolerant of problems than the clientele of kde-redhat unstable (because
problems are what drives people to ask for KDE 3 in the first place).
Kevin Kofler
5:32 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Craig White wrote:
On Fri, 2008-06-20 at 18:09 -0400, David Boles wrote:
> Anne Wilson wrote:
>> On Friday 20 June 2008 21:09:57 Craig White wrote:
>>> My experience is that each Linux
>>> distribution has its own strengths and weaknesses and that all Linux
>>> users benefit from having options.
>> Precisely. I use CentOS where I need total stability, Mandriva where I want
>> ease for technophobics and Fedora on the rest. Where else do you get choice
>> like this?
>
> Anne, and all KDE users. Do any of you really, and I mean really, believe that
> Fedora is responsible for the KDE 'problems'? That the KDE problems are not
> KDE's problems? That Fedora released in their ISO's a KDE that was made
> intentionally to 'break' KDE in Fedora?
>
> I know that you don't Anne ;-) This is mostly addressed at the other users
> posting in these several threads.
>
> Ok. How many of those of you that are disappointed or upset with KDE 4.x did
> any research *before* you installed/upgraded? How many of you downloaded a KDE
> Live-CD and actually tried it *before* you installed/upgraded?
>
> If you did not look or try it first you have very little to really complain
> about here. Would you buy a car, a house, rent an apartment, buy a suit, buy a
> pair of shoes without first looking at them or trying them out/on? Try before
> you buy.
----
this is entirely counter-productive...those who maintain the packages
made the decision to go to KDE-4 and those of use who want to use KDE on
Fedora, will either stay on Fedora 8 or live with KDE-4 on Fedora 9.
KDE is committed to KDE-4 and Fedora-KDE packagers are going with the
flow. There is no future in KDE-3.5.x, only the past.
Things have improved since the original release and the Live-CD probably
doesn't approximate the current experience. It's suitable for my usage.
Please don't get into this concept of blaming users because the packages
made the decision to go to KDE-4 and we all have to deal with it. It's
not a big thing but it's enough to cause me to delay rolling out
Fedora-9 to a network of KDE users for now because of their expectations
and level of skills has them putting files on the Desktop which is
presently dead space on KDE.
I was not blaming the KDE users for these KDE problems.
My comment was directed at those that jumped before they looked. As for "we
all have to deal with it"? Actually you, and others did not. If you/others had
looked/tried KDE 4.x.x you could have stayed with Fedora 8/KDE 3.5.x for about
six months while KDE 4.x.x problems were worked out if you were unhappy.
As for switching distros? You don't really believe that the other distros
won't go to KDE 4.x.x too do you? ;-)
--
David
1:55 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
Konstantin Svist wrote:
I have a question for you, as a maintainer: how much trouble would
one
run into if one wanted to build/maintain unofficial KDE 3 packages for F9?
trouble? none
It would be a significant amount of work, but if someone was interested and willing to do
something like that, more power to 'em.
-- Rex
2:46 p.m.
On Mon June 16 2008 12:28:05 Rex Dieter wrote:
Be careful who you blame here. At akademy 2007, I specifically asked
kde's
upstream developers if parallel installability with kde3 would be possible
or supported... and for an answer, received an emphatic no.
Most major distros seem to providing KDE 3.5 as an alternative to
KDE 4.x. There's no need for both to be installed at the same
time on the same system (which would be hard).
--Mike Bird
8:01 p.m.
Mike Bird wrote:
QUESTION TO DEVELOPERS: Is there any hope of a full KDE 3.5
in F10, plus an upgrade path from F8 to F10 that preserves
KDE 3.5 configurations?
At this point let me say that KDE is dead, now and forever. The old 3.5
is no longer maintained, and as you note below, the 4.x branch is more
compatible at the acronym level than the user experience or application
compatibility level.
This is not to condemn the new direction, simply to offer the opinion
that it is now and forever going off at a tangent from the progress of
3.x, and if you define "works right" to mean "works like 3.5" you are
not ever going to be happy. The root change is not technical, but one of
philosophy, it will never be the same or work the same, because the
maintainers have defined "better" as "different." Or vice versa. Like
the schism of the Catholic and Protestant churches, the KDE developers
are marching the beat of a different drummer, or perhaps a whole
different brass band.
In short, classic KDE is *dead* and unless you can find people to help
you maintain the 3.x branch, it will stay that way.
KDE 4.0 is incomplete and not suitable for most users.
I would agree that choosing it was premature, it's one thing to be
bleeding edge, but KDE 4.0 feels more like a prototype or proof of
concept. I strongly agree that it would have been better to wait until
it was a bit more robust (I am trying to be polite here).
KDE 4.1 will be incomplete and not suitable for most users.
Agree with incomplete, insufficient data for suitability. In a world
where people use VISTA, style may impress more than substance. Like
movies with great special effects and a plot written on the back of a
match book.
The KDE devels are debating whether KDE 4.2 will be usable.
Or the definition of usable. If you don't expect your old 3.5 habits and
applications to work, 4.0 is usable now.
The pro-plasma crowd argue that it is theoretically possible
to implement a desktop by KDE 4.2, but that everyone should
change to using the folderview and forget about real desktops.
I have heard that, but not attributed with any authority. I also hear
don't totally agree with your definition of "real" here.
Probably control center will be fixed by KDE 4.2. It's
debatable whether Dolphin will ever have the usability that
KDE 3.5 Konqueror had, but if it does it won't be until KDE 4.2
at the earliest. F9 already includes a usable KMenu to replace
the KDE 4.0 joke, although the usable KMenu is not the default.
Another dubious decision.
I'm not a KDE developer but I do have users that need to get
work done and they are not interested in a religious conversion
to plasmoids. After reading a lot of KDE developer discussions
my best guess is that KDE 4.3 is the earliest possibility for
most KDE users, but no guarantees.
Look, some will like it, some will hates it, some will change to another
WM. Unless there's a viable life support system for 3.x I doubt users
will go to another distribution to get 3.5 because as I said first, it's
dead.
This puts us in something of a quandary. F9 KDE 4.0 is hugely
annoying to most KDE users. F8 KDE 3.5 still works fine of
course but IIRC security updates will end in six months.
Other than questioning "most," you have summed up the situation.
QUESTION TO DEVELOPERS: Is there any hope of a full KDE 3.5
in F10, plus an upgrade path from F8 to F10 that preserves
KDE 3.5 configurations?
Unless you or someone starts a project to keep it getting security
upgrades for at least a few years, it just isn't a good idea. I suggest
you base your decisions on that. Long term projects need someone who is
driven to keep it going.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen(a)tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
7:56 p.m.
New subject: [OT] Are security updates necessary?
On Sun June 15 2008 17:50:16 Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 7:09 PM, Bill Davidsen
<davidsen(a)tmr.com> wrote:
> The problem is that "use your machine" for most people is not limited to
> playing solitaire on a machine without network connections.
Buy a router? Use the software firewall?
Neither protects against security holes in web browsers,
mail clients, word processors, etc. Any web page you
visit, any email you read, any image you view, any
document you read ... could contain malformed data
trying to exploit buffer overflow or other security bugs.
--Mike Bird
5:56 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 14:58:10 -0700
Mike Bird <mgb-fedora(a)yosemite.net> wrote:
Distros that don't provide KDE 3.5 for their KDE users while KDE
4.x is
being developed will simply lose most of their KDE users. That is not a
good thing for Fedora and that is not a good thing for Red Hat.
That depends, maybe RedHat thinks it would be a good thing if they
didn't have to fool with KDE anymore :-).
I keep getting closer and closer to the point where learning enough
about gentoo to switch to it and customize it out the wazoo is
seeming more and more attractive (except that previous gentoo dabbling
showed me just how much work that would be).
5:48 p.m.
New subject: Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10? I want it too !
On Sat June 14 2008 15:31:04 Arthur Pemberton wrote:
Why not use the version of Fedora that last has KDE 3.5 if this is
such a big deal for you?
You seem to be looping Arthur. F8 security updates end in
about six months and no, you're not safe without them.
--Mike Bird
5771
days inactive
5788
days old
242 comments
36 participants
participants (36)
-
Aaron Konstam -
Andrew Kelly -
Anne Wilson -
Antonio Olivares -
Arthur Pemberton -
Bill Davidsen -
Claude Jones -
Craig White -
David -
Ed Greshko -
Francis Earl -
Fred Erickson -
g -
Gene Heskett -
Ian Chapman -
Joonas Sarajärvi -
Kelly Miller -
Kevin Kofler -
Konstantin Svist -
linux guy -
Luis Orlindo Tedeschi -
Marcelo Magno T. Sales -
Matthew Saltzman -
max -
Michael C -
Mike Bird -
mike cloaked -
Patrick O'Callaghan -
Paul Johnson -
Rex Dieter -
Ric Moore -
Rick Stevens -
stan -
Tim -
Timothy Murphy -
Tom Horsley