Hi,
I'm currently trying to study for the LPIC-1 Linux certification exam and part of it is to familiarize oneself with the different software management utilities. To this end I've tried to download and install 64-bit Fedora versions on a virtual machine. The version for Gnome just will not install, so moving down the list of options, I stumble upon the KDE version, download and install. So far, so good...
To practice prior to my exam I would like to be able to enter commands at the command line: obtaining (separate) terminal windows using KDE comes across as clunky (I usually use Ubuntu - sorry!). Whilst <CNTRL><ALT><F2> to enter a full terminal screen is straightforward, it's not helpful (to me at least) in terms of being able to switch between panes (I generally like a lot of them for things like man pages, different directories, etc.). Konqueror, Konsole and all other thinks, "K" start off as being chipper but after a day, not so much... Access via the main menu is now becoming more than tiresome.
I've trawled through the documentation as best I can (all I want is a couple of meaningful shortcut icons on a desktop - hardly a mammoth operation to my mind) in terms of, "getting started" but creating icons comes across as an insurmountable problem (That whole, "create shortcut on desktop" option just doesn't work on my installation . The shortcut appears: does it run when clicked? Does it cuckoo...). Simple things like mounting the CD drive from a command line can be summarized, according to my impression of Google forum replies, as, "RTFM! RTFM!... It's automatic (the only thing missing here is, 'You idiot')!". [Note: It's *NOT* automatic; nor is in any manual I could locate: one has to create a device folder (at least, that's how I fixed the problem in the end, having tried (and failed) to adopt the "Fedora way", assuming there is such a thing!)] Part of this familiarization process is the reason I downloaded Fedora in the first place, but as a general-purpose (Ubuntu) Linux user, don't really expect to have to read through the entire manual to be unable to accomplish the simplest tasks for a variant of an OS I'm relatively comfortable with.
In terms of rpm / yum, it's mainly plain sailing, but I'm having an issue which don't appear to be addressed effectively from google searches: I try and query packages (using -qv) to be informed that the package is not installed. I try and install it to be informed it's already installed! Any advise you can offer in this regard would be gratefully received.
Equally, I (over?)looked the FAQs for this mailing list, so my pitiful cry for advise in terms of a palatable variant of Fedora may well be a case of, "RTFM, ..."
Finally(!) a question: At the risk of opening a kettle of worms [can of worms / kettle of fish] I believe I'm having a poor Fedora experience because of my being unable to adopt a KDE mindset (correctly?). I believe I've missed something really 'obvious' with regards to the UI. Is it possible to eliminate KDE or should I attempt a different download? Which would you recommend? Am I creating problems for myself by selecting a 64-bit installation or should I go with 32-bit?
Hope you can help.
Thanks for reading,
Best wishes,
And Kemp.
On 08/14/2012 10:17 AM, And Kemp wrote:
Simple things like mounting the CD drive from a command line can be summarized, according to my impression of Google forum replies, as, "RTFM! RTFM!... It's automatic (the only thing missing here is, 'You idiot')!". [Note: It's *NOT* automatic; nor is in any manual I could locate: one has to create a device folder (at least, that's how I fixed the problem in the end, having tried (and failed) to adopt the "Fedora way", assuming there is such a thing!)]
I don't use KDE, but I do have a suggestion. In Xfce, there's a control panel (under Settings, not Administration) called "Removable Drives and Media." If KDE has that, or an equivalent, you should be able to set it to mount drives when they're detected and, if you prefer (I don't) automatically browse it. If not, have you checked with a KDE mailing list or forum? This may be DE related, if so, asking there might be the quickest way to get things working.
Hi Joe,
Thanks for the suggestion. I'm currently installing the DVD release of Fedora, so hopefully will be exposed to all IDEs. I can use the GUI to browse and copy files, but since I'm trying to prepare for Linux certification I'm trying to do everything via the keyboard (it's certainly an eye opener for some things!). I intend to look at Xfce at my earliest opportunity, since I am becoming a little KDE'd out!
Best wishes,
And.
On 14/08/2012 3:41 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 08/14/2012 10:17 AM, And Kemp wrote:
Simple things like mounting the CD drive from a command line can be summarized, according to my impression of Google forum replies, as, "RTFM! RTFM!... It's automatic (the only thing missing here is, 'You idiot')!". [Note: It's *NOT* automatic; nor is in any manual I could locate: one has to create a device folder (at least, that's how I fixed the problem in the end, having tried (and failed) to adopt the "Fedora way", assuming there is such a thing!)]
I don't use KDE, but I do have a suggestion. In Xfce, there's a control panel (under Settings, not Administration) called "Removable Drives and Media." If KDE has that, or an equivalent, you should be able to set it to mount drives when they're detected and, if you prefer (I don't) automatically browse it. If not, have you checked with a KDE mailing list or forum? This may be DE related, if so, asking there might be the quickest way to get things working.
On Tuesday, 14. August 2012. 13.17.58 And Kemp wrote:
To practice prior to my exam I would like to be able to enter commands at the command line: obtaining (separate) terminal windows using KDE comes across as clunky (I usually use Ubuntu - sorry!). Whilst <CNTRL><ALT><F2> to enter a full terminal screen is straightforward, it's not helpful (to me at least) in terms of being able to switch between panes (I generally like a lot of them for things like man pages, different directories, etc.). Konqueror, Konsole and all other thinks, "K" start off as being chipper but after a day, not so much... Access via the main menu is now becoming more than tiresome.
Konsole is the preferred terminal emulator in KDE. You can reach it via the "F"-menu -> System -> Konsole, or as a first option to a context-menu of the desktop (just right-click somewhere on the desktop), or by putting a launcher onto the panel or the desktop (unlock widgets, find Konsole in the menu, right- click, choose "add to panel" or "add to desktop" or whatever...). You can go to systemsettings and assign your favorite shortcut-key combination to start Konsole via the keyboard.
Once started, you can open a various number of tabs with different sessions inside, and easily switch from one to the other. Konsole itself is very configurable both visually and functionally, just go to its "settings" menu and choose "configure current profile".
Ditto for Konqueror and other stuff you might need. In general, KDE is waaay more configurable than Gnome, as far as GUI is concerned.
I've trawled through the documentation as best I can (all I want is a couple of meaningful shortcut icons on a desktop - hardly a mammoth operation to my mind) in terms of, "getting started" but creating icons comes across as an insurmountable problem (That whole, "create shortcut on desktop" option just doesn't work on my installation . The shortcut appears: does it run when clicked? Does it cuckoo...).
I hope that you are aware that "icons on a desktop" is considered to be a Bad Idea (tm) that comes from the Windows world and eventually clutters an otherwise useful desktop space.
In KDE there is the "folder view" widget (you can even put many of them on the desktop), configurable to show the icons from a specific folder (the ~/Desktop by default, IIRC). In addition, if you really really really want to put icons on the desktop (as opposed to the folder view widget), you can:
1. unlock widgets 2. right-click on the desktop to open the context menu 3. choose "Desktop settings" 4. change the "layout" option from "desktop" to "folder view".
That way the whole desktop will behave as one big folder view widget. Regarding step 4., there are some other interesting choices, you might try them out.
Simple things like mounting the CD drive from a command line can be summarized, according to my impression of Google forum replies, as, "RTFM! RTFM!... It's automatic (the only thing missing here is, 'You idiot')!". [Note: It's *NOT* automatic; nor is in any manual I could locate: one has to create a device folder (at least, that's how I fixed the problem in the end, having tried (and failed) to adopt the "Fedora way", assuming there is such a thing!)]
By default, you should have a "device notifier" widget installed in the systray of the panel (or you can put one on the desktop...). Once the CD is in the drive, the device notifier should pop up and ask you what do you want to do with the CD (open it in file manager, view photos, listen to music, etc.). If the CD contains regular data, it should be already mounted by now, in /media/whatever directory. In the device notifier there is also an "eject" button that basically unmounts/ejects your CD. This all also works with USB flash drives etc.
From the command line, you mount the CD via the command (assuming it is not
already mounted automatically):
# mount -t iso9660 /dev/cdrom /your/mount/directory
or something along those lines. You need to be root to do it.
Part of this familiarization process is the reason I downloaded Fedora in the first place, but as a general-purpose (Ubuntu) Linux user, don't really expect to have to read through the entire manual to be unable to accomplish the simplest tasks for a variant of an OS I'm relatively comfortable with.
Every distro has its own quirks. As a long-time Fedora KDE user, I found myself completely inside-out when put in front of an Ubuntu desktop. I found it hard to readjust to the fact that the "close window" button is in the top- left corner instead of the top-right... ;-)
In terms of rpm / yum, it's mainly plain sailing, but I'm having an issue which don't appear to be addressed effectively from google searches: I try and query packages (using -qv) to be informed that the package is not installed. I try and install it to be informed it's already installed!
How about an example? Copy&paste your querries and the responses.
Any advise you can offer in this regard would be gratefully received.
In general, don't use rpm manually. Use yum instead (that's its purpose). Familiarize yourself with man yum, it is very powerful when you know how to ask it. Use it from the terminal session (I don't like GUI's for yum, they are all clunky...).
Finally(!) a question: At the risk of opening a kettle of worms [can of worms / kettle of fish] I believe I'm having a poor Fedora experience because of my being unable to adopt a KDE mindset (correctly?). I believe I've missed something really 'obvious' with regards to the UI.
The most nonobvious obvious thing that you might have missed is the functionality of (un)locking widgets. Other than that, most of the configuration stuff is in systemsettings. There are also other (advanced) aspects of KDE usage like for example "activities". I never needed them, but they can be quite useful in some usecases.
Also, there is a big distinction in philosophy if DE usage between Gnome and KDE. You might need to mentally readjust a bit. :-)
Is it possible to eliminate KDE or should I attempt a different download?
You can have several different DE's coexisting on a single Fedora installation. Gnome, KDE, XFCE, LXDE, Sugar... Not to mention window managers. Switch between them on the login screen (choose session). To install them,
1. yum grouplist 2. find your desktop of choice in the list 3. yum groupinstall "name of the group"
Don't omit the quotes in step 3, there might be spaces or stuff in the group name.
Which would you recommend?
I use KDE. Default is Gnome3 (but under a lot of criticism since the switch from Gnome2). Most Gnome2-oriented people on this list will recommend XFCE or LXDE (and they are probably right if you are used to the old Gnome2). You can also try Sugar if you are 10 years old... ;-)
Mind you, since you are running Fedora in a VM, the 3D accelerated graphics is probably not supported (or not supported well enough...). Gnome3 will probably fail miserably into the fallback mode, KDE will miss all the Compiz-like eye- candy visual effects that are otherwise present, and maybe something similar for XFCE/LXDE. YMMV.
Am I creating problems for myself by selecting a 64-bit installation or should I go with 32-bit?
In general, no. There should be no difference between 32/64bit installs, bar some very peculiar situations (proprietary software, amount of RAM, skype, etc...). I am on 64bit for several years now, and never had any issues. 64bit is considered computationally superior in some generic circumstances, which is to be expected.
In particular, since you are running Fedora in a virtual machine, the 64bit guest OS depends on how well 64bit software is supported by your virtual machine and the host OS. I've seen cases where 64bit clients are not supported or do not work properly. However, I've only ever run Windows in a VM myself, Fedora was always on the hardware.
HTH, :-) Marko
Hi Marko,
This is exactly the kind of stuff I was looking for - thanks!
Best wishes,
And.
On 14/08/2012 5:03 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
On Tuesday, 14. August 2012. 13.17.58 And Kemp wrote:
To practice prior to my exam I would like to be able to enter commands at the command line: obtaining (separate) terminal windows using KDE comes across as clunky (I usually use Ubuntu - sorry!). Whilst <CNTRL><ALT><F2> to enter a full terminal screen is straightforward, it's not helpful (to me at least) in terms of being able to switch between panes (I generally like a lot of them for things like man pages, different directories, etc.). Konqueror, Konsole and all other thinks, "K" start off as being chipper but after a day, not so much... Access via the main menu is now becoming more than tiresome.
Konsole is the preferred terminal emulator in KDE. You can reach it via the "F"-menu -> System -> Konsole, or as a first option to a context-menu of the desktop (just right-click somewhere on the desktop), or by putting a launcher onto the panel or the desktop (unlock widgets, find Konsole in the menu, right- click, choose "add to panel" or "add to desktop" or whatever...). You can go to systemsettings and assign your favorite shortcut-key combination to start Konsole via the keyboard.
Once started, you can open a various number of tabs with different sessions inside, and easily switch from one to the other. Konsole itself is very configurable both visually and functionally, just go to its "settings" menu and choose "configure current profile".
Ditto for Konqueror and other stuff you might need. In general, KDE is waaay more configurable than Gnome, as far as GUI is concerned.
I've trawled through the documentation as best I can (all I want is a couple of meaningful shortcut icons on a desktop - hardly a mammoth operation to my mind) in terms of, "getting started" but creating icons comes across as an insurmountable problem (That whole, "create shortcut on desktop" option just doesn't work on my installation . The shortcut appears: does it run when clicked? Does it cuckoo...).
I hope that you are aware that "icons on a desktop" is considered to be a Bad Idea (tm) that comes from the Windows world and eventually clutters an otherwise useful desktop space.
In KDE there is the "folder view" widget (you can even put many of them on the desktop), configurable to show the icons from a specific folder (the ~/Desktop by default, IIRC). In addition, if you really really really want to put icons on the desktop (as opposed to the folder view widget), you can:
- unlock widgets
- right-click on the desktop to open the context menu
- choose "Desktop settings"
- change the "layout" option from "desktop" to "folder view".
That way the whole desktop will behave as one big folder view widget. Regarding step 4., there are some other interesting choices, you might try them out.
Simple things like mounting the CD drive from a command line can be summarized, according to my impression of Google forum replies, as, "RTFM! RTFM!... It's automatic (the only thing missing here is, 'You idiot')!". [Note: It's *NOT* automatic; nor is in any manual I could locate: one has to create a device folder (at least, that's how I fixed the problem in the end, having tried (and failed) to adopt the "Fedora way", assuming there is such a thing!)]
By default, you should have a "device notifier" widget installed in the systray of the panel (or you can put one on the desktop...). Once the CD is in the drive, the device notifier should pop up and ask you what do you want to do with the CD (open it in file manager, view photos, listen to music, etc.). If the CD contains regular data, it should be already mounted by now, in /media/whatever directory. In the device notifier there is also an "eject" button that basically unmounts/ejects your CD. This all also works with USB flash drives etc.
From the command line, you mount the CD via the command (assuming it is not already mounted automatically):
# mount -t iso9660 /dev/cdrom /your/mount/directory
or something along those lines. You need to be root to do it.
Part of this familiarization process is the reason I downloaded Fedora in the first place, but as a general-purpose (Ubuntu) Linux user, don't really expect to have to read through the entire manual to be unable to accomplish the simplest tasks for a variant of an OS I'm relatively comfortable with.
Every distro has its own quirks. As a long-time Fedora KDE user, I found myself completely inside-out when put in front of an Ubuntu desktop. I found it hard to readjust to the fact that the "close window" button is in the top- left corner instead of the top-right... ;-)
In terms of rpm / yum, it's mainly plain sailing, but I'm having an issue which don't appear to be addressed effectively from google searches: I try and query packages (using -qv) to be informed that the package is not installed. I try and install it to be informed it's already installed!
How about an example? Copy&paste your querries and the responses.
Any advise you can offer in this regard would be gratefully received.
In general, don't use rpm manually. Use yum instead (that's its purpose). Familiarize yourself with man yum, it is very powerful when you know how to ask it. Use it from the terminal session (I don't like GUI's for yum, they are all clunky...).
Finally(!) a question: At the risk of opening a kettle of worms [can of worms / kettle of fish] I believe I'm having a poor Fedora experience because of my being unable to adopt a KDE mindset (correctly?). I believe I've missed something really 'obvious' with regards to the UI.
The most nonobvious obvious thing that you might have missed is the functionality of (un)locking widgets. Other than that, most of the configuration stuff is in systemsettings. There are also other (advanced) aspects of KDE usage like for example "activities". I never needed them, but they can be quite useful in some usecases.
Also, there is a big distinction in philosophy if DE usage between Gnome and KDE. You might need to mentally readjust a bit. :-)
Is it possible to eliminate KDE or should I attempt a different download?
You can have several different DE's coexisting on a single Fedora installation. Gnome, KDE, XFCE, LXDE, Sugar... Not to mention window managers. Switch between them on the login screen (choose session). To install them,
- yum grouplist
- find your desktop of choice in the list
- yum groupinstall "name of the group"
Don't omit the quotes in step 3, there might be spaces or stuff in the group name.
Which would you recommend?
I use KDE. Default is Gnome3 (but under a lot of criticism since the switch from Gnome2). Most Gnome2-oriented people on this list will recommend XFCE or LXDE (and they are probably right if you are used to the old Gnome2). You can also try Sugar if you are 10 years old... ;-)
Mind you, since you are running Fedora in a VM, the 3D accelerated graphics is probably not supported (or not supported well enough...). Gnome3 will probably fail miserably into the fallback mode, KDE will miss all the Compiz-like eye- candy visual effects that are otherwise present, and maybe something similar for XFCE/LXDE. YMMV.
Am I creating problems for myself by selecting a 64-bit installation or should I go with 32-bit?
In general, no. There should be no difference between 32/64bit installs, bar some very peculiar situations (proprietary software, amount of RAM, skype, etc...). I am on 64bit for several years now, and never had any issues. 64bit is considered computationally superior in some generic circumstances, which is to be expected.
In particular, since you are running Fedora in a virtual machine, the 64bit guest OS depends on how well 64bit software is supported by your virtual machine and the host OS. I've seen cases where 64bit clients are not supported or do not work properly. However, I've only ever run Windows in a VM myself, Fedora was always on the hardware.
HTH, :-) Marko
On 08/14/2012 02:03 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
I hope that you are aware that "icons on a desktop" is considered to be a Bad Idea (tm) that comes from the Windows world and eventually clutters an otherwise useful desktop space.
I beg to differ. Icons on a desktop make it quick and easy to launch programs that you use constantly. What's a Bad Idea from the Windows world is having every program you install insist on putting another icon on your desktop, generally speaking without asking. In fact, I know of one game (Joint Operations, from NovaLogic) that puts Yet Another Icon on your desktop for every upgrade mod you install so that you can launch the original version, or with either one or both of the upgrades active. Why anybody wants to is left unanswered.
Clearly, you don't particularly like icons. That's fine; you don't have to use them if you don't want to. However, it's not up to you (or anybody else) to tell us we shouldn't use them simply because you don't like them. That kind of One True Way thinking is not only one of the things that made many of us investigate Linux in the first place, it's one of the things that drove me (and probably others) away from Gnome3.
Sorry to rant, but stating personal opinions as though they were indisputable facts tends to push one of my buttons.
On Tuesday, 14. August 2012. 14.22.52 Joe Zeff wrote:
On 08/14/2012 02:03 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
I hope that you are aware that "icons on a desktop" is considered to be a Bad Idea (tm) that comes from the Windows world and eventually clutters an otherwise useful desktop space.
I beg to differ. Icons on a desktop make it quick and easy to launch programs that you use constantly.
:-)
I'd say that launchers are the most quick and easy way to launch programs. Of course, that is a matter of usecase. I tend to put every app in fullscreen or maximize its window, covering the whole desktop. In such circumstances, having a button on the panel is much more effective than minimizing all apps in order to reach the icon on the desktop. But that's beside the point...
What's a Bad Idea from the Windows world is having every program you install insist on putting another icon on your desktop, generally speaking without asking.
Precisely.
Clearly, you don't particularly like icons. That's fine; you don't have to use them if you don't want to. However, it's not up to you (or anybody else) to tell us we shouldn't use them simply because you don't like them. That kind of One True Way thinking is not only one of the things that made many of us investigate Linux in the first place, it's one of the things that drove me (and probably others) away from Gnome3.
Oh, sorry, I didn't mean it to be understood as the One True Way. The thing is, I was too fast to write the quoted statement above, and wasn't very precise. So let me rephrase:
I hope that you are aware that "icons on a desktop" is considered to be a Bad Idea (tm) --- within most of the KDE community --- that comes from the Windows world and eventually clutters an otherwise useful desktop space.
We were talking in the context of KDE, so I wasn't precise enough... :-)
Sorry to rant, but stating personal opinions as though they were indisputable facts tends to push one of my buttons.
Sorry for pushing one of your buttons, Joe. :-)
Btw, this opinion is not just my personal one, it is in fact a generally accepted one in the KDE devs community. The KDE4 desktop was designed with this opinion in mind, and the folder-view-across-desktop thing was added in as a (non-default) option only after some pressure from the users who insisted on having icons on the desktop. (Also, KDE4 devs were a bit friendlier to such users than the Gnome3 devs...). So it actually is a prevailing opinion in the KDE world.
Best, :-) Marko
On 08/14/2012 04:38 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
I'd say that launchers are the most quick and easy way to launch programs. Of course, that is a matter of usecase. I tend to put every app in fullscreen or maximize its window, covering the whole desktop.
Clearly a case of different strokes for different folks as I never maximize a program (other than a game) unless it actually needs that much screen real estate. I sometimes have several windows open on the same workspace so that I can copy things from one into the other one easier.
On 08/14/2012 05:03 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
On Tuesday, 14. August 2012. 13.17.58 And Kemp wrote:
To practice prior to my exam I would like to be able to enter commands at the command line: obtaining (separate) terminal windows using KDE comes across as clunky (I usually use Ubuntu - sorry!). Whilst <CNTRL><ALT><F2> to enter a full terminal screen is straightforward, it's not helpful (to me at least) in terms of being able to switch between panes (I generally like a lot of them for things like man pages, different directories, etc.). Konqueror, Konsole and all other thinks, "K" start off as being chipper but after a day, not so much... Access via the main menu is now becoming more than tiresome.
Konsole is the preferred terminal emulator in KDE. You can reach it via the "F"-menu -> System -> Konsole, or as a first option to a context-menu of the desktop (just right-click somewhere on the desktop), or by putting a launcher onto the panel or the desktop (unlock widgets, find Konsole in the menu, right- click, choose "add to panel" or "add to desktop" or whatever...). You can go to systemsettings and assign your favorite shortcut-key combination to start Konsole via the keyboard.
Once started, you can open a various number of tabs with different sessions inside, and easily switch from one to the other. Konsole itself is very configurable both visually and functionally, just go to its "settings" menu and choose "configure current profile".
Ditto for Konqueror and other stuff you might need. In general, KDE is waaay more configurable than Gnome, as far as GUI is concerned.
I've trawled through the documentation as best I can (all I want is a couple of meaningful shortcut icons on a desktop - hardly a mammoth operation to my mind) in terms of, "getting started" but creating icons comes across as an insurmountable problem (That whole, "create shortcut on desktop" option just doesn't work on my installation . The shortcut appears: does it run when clicked? Does it cuckoo...).
I hope that you are aware that "icons on a desktop" is considered to be a Bad Idea (tm) that comes from the Windows world and eventually clutters an otherwise useful desktop space.
In KDE there is the "folder view" widget (you can even put many of them on the desktop), configurable to show the icons from a specific folder (the ~/Desktop by default, IIRC). In addition, if you really really really want to put icons on the desktop (as opposed to the folder view widget), you can:
- unlock widgets
- right-click on the desktop to open the context menu
- choose "Desktop settings"
- change the "layout" option from "desktop" to "folder view".
That way the whole desktop will behave as one big folder view widget. Regarding step 4., there are some other interesting choices, you might try them out.
Simple things like mounting the CD drive from a command line can be summarized, according to my impression of Google forum replies, as, "RTFM! RTFM!... It's automatic (the only thing missing here is, 'You idiot')!". [Note: It's *NOT* automatic; nor is in any manual I could locate: one has to create a device folder (at least, that's how I fixed the problem in the end, having tried (and failed) to adopt the "Fedora way", assuming there is such a thing!)]
By default, you should have a "device notifier" widget installed in the systray of the panel (or you can put one on the desktop...). Once the CD is in the drive, the device notifier should pop up and ask you what do you want to do with the CD (open it in file manager, view photos, listen to music, etc.). If the CD contains regular data, it should be already mounted by now, in /media/whatever directory. In the device notifier there is also an "eject" button that basically unmounts/ejects your CD. This all also works with USB flash drives etc.
From the command line, you mount the CD via the command (assuming it is not already mounted automatically):
# mount -t iso9660 /dev/cdrom /your/mount/directory
or something along those lines. You need to be root to do it.
Part of this familiarization process is the reason I downloaded Fedora in the first place, but as a general-purpose (Ubuntu) Linux user, don't really expect to have to read through the entire manual to be unable to accomplish the simplest tasks for a variant of an OS I'm relatively comfortable with.
Every distro has its own quirks. As a long-time Fedora KDE user, I found myself completely inside-out when put in front of an Ubuntu desktop. I found it hard to readjust to the fact that the "close window" button is in the top- left corner instead of the top-right... ;-)
In terms of rpm / yum, it's mainly plain sailing, but I'm having an issue which don't appear to be addressed effectively from google searches: I try and query packages (using -qv) to be informed that the package is not installed. I try and install it to be informed it's already installed!
How about an example? Copy&paste your querries and the responses.
Any advise you can offer in this regard would be gratefully received.
In general, don't use rpm manually. Use yum instead (that's its purpose). Familiarize yourself with man yum, it is very powerful when you know how to ask it. Use it from the terminal session (I don't like GUI's for yum, they are all clunky...).
Finally(!) a question: At the risk of opening a kettle of worms [can of worms / kettle of fish] I believe I'm having a poor Fedora experience because of my being unable to adopt a KDE mindset (correctly?). I believe I've missed something really 'obvious' with regards to the UI.
The most nonobvious obvious thing that you might have missed is the functionality of (un)locking widgets. Other than that, most of the configuration stuff is in systemsettings. There are also other (advanced) aspects of KDE usage like for example "activities". I never needed them, but they can be quite useful in some usecases.
Also, there is a big distinction in philosophy if DE usage between Gnome and KDE. You might need to mentally readjust a bit. :-)
Is it possible to eliminate KDE or should I attempt a different download?
You can have several different DE's coexisting on a single Fedora installation. Gnome, KDE, XFCE, LXDE, Sugar... Not to mention window managers. Switch between them on the login screen (choose session). To install them,
- yum grouplist
- find your desktop of choice in the list
- yum groupinstall "name of the group"
Don't omit the quotes in step 3, there might be spaces or stuff in the group name.
Which would you recommend?
I use KDE. Default is Gnome3 (but under a lot of criticism since the switch from Gnome2). Most Gnome2-oriented people on this list will recommend XFCE or LXDE (and they are probably right if you are used to the old Gnome2). You can also try Sugar if you are 10 years old... ;-)
Mind you, since you are running Fedora in a VM, the 3D accelerated graphics is probably not supported (or not supported well enough...). Gnome3 will probably fail miserably into the fallback mode, KDE will miss all the Compiz-like eye- candy visual effects that are otherwise present, and maybe something similar for XFCE/LXDE. YMMV.
Am I creating problems for myself by selecting a 64-bit installation or should I go with 32-bit?
In general, no. There should be no difference between 32/64bit installs, bar some very peculiar situations (proprietary software, amount of RAM, skype, etc...). I am on 64bit for several years now, and never had any issues. 64bit is considered computationally superior in some generic circumstances, which is to be expected.
In particular, since you are running Fedora in a virtual machine, the 64bit guest OS depends on how well 64bit software is supported by your virtual machine and the host OS. I've seen cases where 64bit clients are not supported or do not work properly. However, I've only ever run Windows in a VM myself, Fedora was always on the hardware.
HTH, :-) Marko
Just as an aside, I came from a Windows environment a while ago, and I've not only grown used to, but almost dare I say "love" Gnome3 and all it's "left-of-center" ways! I hope that even if they decide to "add" a few different DE's to this distro, (Cinnamon,...MATE...etc.) that they NEVER get rid of Gnome! The funniest thing?...is when I'm at work (IT Ops for a Swiftwater PA corp.) and I'm rushing through some admin task, when it comes time to open up a new task or browse to a certain folder, I find myself pointing to the left uppermost corner and being shocked and worried when nothing happens....only to realize that I'm not using Fedora!.,...LoL! THAT'S how much I've become used to it!...
EGO II
On 08/14/2012 05:22 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 08/14/2012 02:03 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
I hope that you are aware that "icons on a desktop" is considered to be a Bad Idea (tm) that comes from the Windows world and eventually clutters an otherwise useful desktop space.
I beg to differ. Icons on a desktop make it quick and easy to launch programs that you use constantly. What's a Bad Idea from the Windows world is having every program you install insist on putting another icon on your desktop, generally speaking without asking. In fact, I know of one game (Joint Operations, from NovaLogic) that puts Yet Another Icon on your desktop for every upgrade mod you install so that you can launch the original version, or with either one or both of the upgrades active. Why anybody wants to is left unanswered.
Clearly, you don't particularly like icons. That's fine; you don't have to use them if you don't want to. However, it's not up to you (or anybody else) to tell us we shouldn't use them simply because you don't like them. That kind of One True Way thinking is not only one of the things that made many of us investigate Linux in the first place, it's one of the things that drove me (and probably others) away from Gnome3.
Sorry to rant, but stating personal opinions as though they were indisputable facts tends to push one of my buttons.
As I've learned from experience!....LoL!
EGO II
-
And Kemp -
EGO-II.1 -
Joe Zeff -
Marko Vojinovic