I'd like to be asked during installation if I want to use Gnome or KDE or some other environment. Am I alone in this? One has to go through a slightly tortuous path to get KDE installed.
2009/10/10 Timothy Murphy gayleard@eircom.net:
I'd like to be asked during installation if I want to use Gnome or KDE or some other environment. Am I alone in this? One has to go through a slightly tortuous path to get KDE installed.
-- 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
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Take a look at this: http://docs.fedoraproject.org/install-guide/f11/en-US/html/sn-package-select...
It's from the f11 installation guide (section software selection). Just click on "desktop environments" and choose KDE or GNOME. It's simple enough.
Joshua C. wrote:
I'd like to be asked during installation if I want to use Gnome or KDE or some other environment. Am I alone in this? One has to go through a slightly tortuous path to get KDE installed.
Take a look at this: http://docs.fedoraproject.org/install-guide/f11/en-US/html/sn-package-
selection.html
It's from the f11 installation guide (section software selection). Just click on "desktop environments" and choose KDE or GNOME. It's simple enough.
How many people installing Fedora for the first - or even the second - time would choose to "Customize now"? It is like saying, "If you think you are cleverer than me, press this button".
On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 12:37:28 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:
"If you think you are cleverer than me, press this button".
Good point.
2009/10/10 Valent Turkovic valent.turkovic@gmail.com:
On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 12:37:28 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:
"If you think you are cleverer than me, press this button".
Good point.
-- pratite me na twitteru - www.twitter.com/valentt http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com/ linux, blog, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org. ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
I understand your frustration but I cannot agree with you.
The installation process guides you through some basic points (like grub, partitioning, basic packages). Most distributions nowadays ship with both kde and gnome. By default fedora installs gnome and I think every user who wants to try it should know this. It's not about being clever or not. The PackageKit then gives you the ability to install and set kde.
Even typing "set kde as default in fedora during installation" in google will give you tons of examples how to do it. And the installation guide is really well written. The only problem is how many people ever read it?
Basic productivity means just this: basic: the ability to use your hardware for doing simple computer tasks. If you want something more then you should at least try to find some information about it.
You want to "customize" fedora with your preference for kde. Therefore it's "natural" for me to click on "customize now" because it differs from the default options. This option isn't hidden and it doesn't make the installer clever than you.
How would you react if instead of "customize now" the button read "choose default environment and extra packages"? Would that change anything during the installation? Think about how many people would like to "customize" thier installation with options ranging from "setting default environment" to "options for sound card", etc. There is no way to satisfy all those wishes. Anakonda really gives you enough tools to customze your system but you have to learn how to use this installer.
Joshua C. wrote:
The installation process guides you through some basic points (like grub, partitioning, basic packages).
While I am at it, I think the partitioning options are badly put, too. The first option should be to use the current partitions, in my view. The second should be to set up partitions as one wants.
I suspect that most people who have installed Fedora before know that it is best to avoid the crazy system suggested by Anaconda.
Most distributions nowadays ship with both kde and gnome. By default fedora installs gnome and I think every user who wants to try it should know this. It's not about being clever or not. The PackageKit then gives you the ability to install and set kde.
I'm not sure what this means. It is more or less impossible to replace Gnome by KDE after installation, in my experience.
I'm afraid that I suspect a political or philosophical motive at work here. Redhat/Anaconda have a sort of vestigial loyalty to Gnome, and don't want the alternative to be too visible.
It's a bit like asking a Ford dealer to admit he sells more Toyotas.
On Sat, 2009-10-10 at 14:34 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Joshua C. wrote:
The installation process guides you through some basic points (like grub, partitioning, basic packages).
While I am at it, I think the partitioning options are badly put, too. The first option should be to use the current partitions, in my view. The second should be to set up partitions as one wants.
I kind of agree. I must have installed every Fedora system since FC1 and every single time I get to this question (or the equivalent in earlier versions) I have doubts about how to proceed. I almost always want to keep my existing partition scheme and just install (not update) the new Fedora version on /, preserving /home untouched, but the dialogue doesn't make it easy to understand how to do this. It would reduce installation anxiety considerably if Anaconda told me the exact consequences of each option before asking me to confirm, but for some reason every time I get to this point I find myself wondering "what does this *really* mean?".
Maybe I'm just paranoid.
I suspect that most people who have installed Fedora before know that it is best to avoid the crazy system suggested by Anaconda.
Most distributions nowadays ship with both kde and gnome. By default fedora installs gnome and I think every user who wants to try it should know this. It's not about being clever or not. The PackageKit then gives you the ability to install and set kde.
I'm not sure what this means. It is more or less impossible to replace Gnome by KDE after installation, in my experience.
Strictly speaking it *is* impossible to install Fedora without at least part of Gnome. Installing both and choosing one or the other is not difficult. Installing from a KDE-focussed download isn't hard either and is usually what I do.
I'm afraid that I suspect a political or philosophical motive at work here. Redhat/Anaconda have a sort of vestigial loyalty to Gnome, and don't want the alternative to be too visible.
There's nothing vestigial about it. Fedora is upfront about being a Gnome distro which also supports KDE. For example the upcoming DeviceKit stuff mentions Gnome components in the same breath as the kernel. This is common in Fedora docs. I gripe about it from time to time but I doubt anything can be done about it at present. The current state of free desktop architectures doesn't seem to allow neutrality.
poc
On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 7:22 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan pocallaghan@gmail.com wrote:
There's nothing vestigial about it. Fedora is upfront about being a Gnome distro which also supports KDE. For example the upcoming DeviceKit stuff mentions Gnome components in the same breath as the kernel. This is common in Fedora docs. I gripe about it from time to time but I doubt anything can be done about it at present. The current state of free desktop architectures doesn't seem to allow neutrality.
Then step up and do the work, if you want KDE on an equal footing. It's not like the KDE people within Fedora haven't been saying this for ages and ages and ages.
Gods know I couldn't care less about KDE, but the incessant "wah wah wah we're a second-class citizen" gets very old.
On Sat, 2009-10-10 at 08:10 -0700, Marc Wilson wrote:
On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 7:22 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan pocallaghan@gmail.com wrote:
There's nothing vestigial about it. Fedora is upfront about being a Gnome distro which also supports KDE. For example the upcoming DeviceKit stuff mentions Gnome components in the same breath as the kernel. This is common in Fedora docs. I gripe about it from time to time but I doubt anything can be done about it at present. The current state of free desktop architectures doesn't seem to allow neutrality.
Then step up and do the work, if you want KDE on an equal footing. It's not like the KDE people within Fedora haven't been saying this for ages and ages and ages.
Gods know I couldn't care less about KDE, but the incessant "wah wah wah we're a second-class citizen" gets very old.
I'm simply responding to Tim's comment with my take on the facts as they are. I don't expect them to change and I'm certainly not in a position to change them myself, but I use Fedora anyway as it's by far the best distro out there for what I want.
The perennial "if you don't like it then fix the problem yourself or just shut up" is what gets very old, as do witty paraphrases such as "you can always return it for a full refund". So only seasoned developers get to have an opinion and the rest of us can just take what we get and be thankful? I don't think so.
poc
On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 8:39 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan pocallaghan@gmail.com wrote:
The perennial "if you don't like it then fix the problem yourself or just shut up" is what gets very old, as do witty paraphrases such as "you can always return it for a full refund". So only seasoned developers get to have an opinion and the rest of us can just take what we get and be thankful? I don't think so.
Everyone certainly gets to have an opinion.
The KDE thing is very old. The difference, however, is that the KDE people within Fedora are, always saying "please, come help us", and all anyone wants to do is complain about how things aren't the way they think they should be.
File bug reports. Help with translations. Do whatever.
No one wants to.
(gods help me, the world is about to implode, I'm speaking in favor of KDE)
On Sat, 2009-10-10 at 11:09 -0700, Marc Wilson wrote:
On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 8:39 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan pocallaghan@gmail.com wrote:
The perennial "if you don't like it then fix the problem yourself or just shut up" is what gets very old, as do witty paraphrases such as "you can always return it for a full refund". So only seasoned developers get to have an opinion and the rest of us can just take what we get and be thankful? I don't think so.
Everyone certainly gets to have an opinion.
The KDE thing is very old. The difference, however, is that the KDE people within Fedora are, always saying "please, come help us", and all anyone wants to do is complain about how things aren't the way they think they should be.
File bug reports. Help with translations. Do whatever.
No one wants to.
Depends where you look. Not everything is on this list, for example the Fedora-KDE list is full of people making bug reports and try to help however they can (and griping and asking questions like they do here of course; that's what lists are for). I've filed a good 6 or 7 reports in the past year or so.
However filing a bug report on a KDE app has no effect whatever on the general Gnome-based policy of Fedora. Once again: I understand this and don't expect it to change because I believe the state of the art in Linux desktops simply hasn't reached a point where a distro can be both genuinely DE-neutral and fully functional. The freedesktop people are doing what they can and a lot of progress has been made, but there's a long way to go.
Platforms where you don't get a choice don't have this problem of course. They have other problems instead.
poc
On 10/10/2009 4:29 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Sat, 2009-10-10 at 11:09 -0700, Marc Wilson wrote:
On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 8:39 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan pocallaghan@gmail.com wrote:
The perennial "if you don't like it then fix the problem yourself or just shut up" is what gets very old, as do witty paraphrases such as "you can always return it for a full refund". So only seasoned developers get to have an opinion and the rest of us can just take what we get and be thankful? I don't think so.
Everyone certainly gets to have an opinion.
The KDE thing is very old. The difference, however, is that the KDE people within Fedora are, always saying "please, come help us", and all anyone wants to do is complain about how things aren't the way they think they should be.
File bug reports. Help with translations. Do whatever.
No one wants to.
Depends where you look. Not everything is on this list, for example the Fedora-KDE list is full of people making bug reports and try to help however they can (and griping and asking questions like they do here of course; that's what lists are for). I've filed a good 6 or 7 reports in the past year or so.
However filing a bug report on a KDE app has no effect whatever on the general Gnome-based policy of Fedora. Once again: I understand this and don't expect it to change because I believe the state of the art in Linux desktops simply hasn't reached a point where a distro can be both genuinely DE-neutral and fully functional. The freedesktop people are doing what they can and a lot of progress has been made, but there's a long way to go.
Platforms where you don't get a choice don't have this problem of course. They have other problems instead.
If your 'problem' with KDE belongs to Fedora, Fedora package specific, was mine I would post it on Fedora's Bugzilla. If it was a KDE specific problem I would post it on the KDE Bugzilla. The same would hold true of specific questions.
As for Fedora being a GNOME *based* disto? Many, most?, of the Fedora configuration *applications* are written in the same GTK that GNOME is written in but Fedora runs just fine with only a KDE, or other, Desktop installed and without a GNOME Desktop installed at all. You will, of course, still see some libs and such as they are needed by the system applications. But no GNOME Desktop will be installed, or be available to run, *if* you tell the installer not to install a GNOME Desktop.
On Sat, 2009-10-10 at 17:18 -0400, David wrote:
As for Fedora being a GNOME *based* disto? Many, most?, of the Fedora configuration *applications* are written in the same GTK that GNOME is written in but Fedora runs just fine with only a KDE, or other, Desktop installed and without a GNOME Desktop installed at all. You will, of course, still see some libs and such as they are needed by the system applications. But no GNOME Desktop will be installed, or be available to run, *if* you tell the installer not to install a GNOME Desktop.
I don't think that contradicts anything I've said. The fact that "system applications" need parts of a specific DE (even if no actual desktop is installed) means that the distro is not DE-neutral, and once again, I don't expect it to be in the current state of the art.
poc
On 10/10/2009 6:56 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Sat, 2009-10-10 at 17:18 -0400, David wrote:
As for Fedora being a GNOME *based* disto? Many, most?, of the Fedora configuration *applications* are written in the same GTK that GNOME is written in but Fedora runs just fine with only a KDE, or other, Desktop installed and without a GNOME Desktop installed at all. You will, of course, still see some libs and such as they are needed by the system applications. But no GNOME Desktop will be installed, or be available to run, *if* you tell the installer not to install a GNOME Desktop.
I don't think that contradicts anything I've said. The fact that "system applications" need parts of a specific DE (even if no actual desktop is installed) means that the distro is not DE-neutral, and once again, I don't expect it to be in the current state of the art.
One more time. The GTK2 that is used to write the system applications is GTK2. A programing language platform. No more and no less.
KDE is written in QT4. None of the system applications that I can think of now are written in QT4. None that I know of anyway. Not in Fedora. Not in any other distribution that I can think of at the moment. Not one.
At this very moment I can think of three other major distrobutions that install KDE only. Period. They *do not* install a GNOME Desktop at all unless you tell the installer to do that. None of them. Not a one. Will you see GTK2 'stuff' on then? Darn straight you will. All of them.
Which means you need to convince the KDE folks to reinvent the wheel and write system configuration applications in QT4. And then you need to convince some, any, distribution to change their entire system configuration and to use the new files and to not use what they have used for years. All so that you can have a GTK free install without any of 'that nasty GNOME crap' installed.
Good luck with that. :-)
And it is not just the system files either. Some tiny application that you use will need the libs and *pow* there goes your pristine, KDE only, system.
Have a nice night.
On Sat, 2009-10-10 at 19:21 -0400, David wrote:
On 10/10/2009 6:56 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Sat, 2009-10-10 at 17:18 -0400, David wrote:
As for Fedora being a GNOME *based* disto? Many, most?, of the Fedora configuration *applications* are written in the same GTK that GNOME is written in but Fedora runs just fine with only a KDE, or other, Desktop installed and without a GNOME Desktop installed at all. You will, of course, still see some libs and such as they are needed by the system applications. But no GNOME Desktop will be installed, or be available to run, *if* you tell the installer not to install a GNOME Desktop.
I don't think that contradicts anything I've said. The fact that "system applications" need parts of a specific DE (even if no actual desktop is installed) means that the distro is not DE-neutral, and once again, I don't expect it to be in the current state of the art.
One more time. The GTK2 that is used to write the system applications is GTK2. A programing language platform. No more and no less.
The very first sentence on http://www.gtk.org/ is: "GTK+ is a highly usable, feature rich toolkit for creating graphical user interfaces which boasts cross platform compatibility and an easy to use API."
OK, so my question is *not*, as you seem to think, "why do I have to use this when I prefer KDE?", but "why do system applications need this if they don't have a graphical user interface?".
[...]
All so that you can have a GTK free install without any of 'that nasty GNOME crap' installed.
You seem to have gotten it into your head that I have some problem with Gnome. If you look back at this thread I think you'll realize that this is entirely imaginary.
Cheers.
poc
On 10/10/2009 8:03 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Sat, 2009-10-10 at 19:21 -0400, David wrote:
On 10/10/2009 6:56 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Sat, 2009-10-10 at 17:18 -0400, David wrote:
As for Fedora being a GNOME *based* disto? Many, most?, of the Fedora configuration *applications* are written in the same GTK that GNOME is written in but Fedora runs just fine with only a KDE, or other, Desktop installed and without a GNOME Desktop installed at all. You will, of course, still see some libs and such as they are needed by the system applications. But no GNOME Desktop will be installed, or be available to run, *if* you tell the installer not to install a GNOME Desktop.
I don't think that contradicts anything I've said. The fact that "system applications" need parts of a specific DE (even if no actual desktop is installed) means that the distro is not DE-neutral, and once again, I don't expect it to be in the current state of the art.
One more time. The GTK2 that is used to write the system applications is GTK2. A programing language platform. No more and no less.
The very first sentence on http://www.gtk.org/ is: "GTK+ is a highly usable, feature rich toolkit for creating graphical user interfaces which boasts cross platform compatibility and an easy to use API."
OK, so my question is *not*, as you seem to think, "why do I have to use this when I prefer KDE?", but "why do system applications need this if they don't have a graphical user interface?".
[...]
All so that you can have a GTK free install without any of 'that nasty GNOME crap' installed.
You seem to have gotten it into your head that I have some problem with Gnome. If you look back at this thread I think you'll realize that this is entirely imaginary.
Marc Wilson said it much better than I have.
The applications have to be written in 'something'. These happen to be written in GTK. And my point was that that does not make Fedora a GNOME distribution. It appears to me that Fedora *chooses* to be a GNOME Desktop default distro.
As for your personal feeling about GNOME? Your business. Your choice.
On Sat, 2009-10-10 at 21:01 -0400, David wrote:
The applications have to be written in 'something'. These happen to be written in GTK. And my point was that that does not make Fedora a GNOME distribution. It appears to me that Fedora *chooses* to be a GNOME Desktop default distro.
Well, the only thing the *have* to be written in is "something that exposes the Linux API", (recalling that we're talking about system apps here). The API defines the lowest common denominator, anything else is an optional extra. However that's beside the point.
I was trying to argue that Fedora is a Gnome distro based on such considerations, but taking into account both your own and Rahul's (and Marc's) comments I can see that this argument as such doesn't hold up.
Nevertheless, it remains true that Fedora is a Gnome-based distro! Why? Because it's all over the documentation. I doubt you'll find the phrase "Fedora is a Gnome-based distro" anywhere in the docs, but the fact remains that at every juncture where a DE is relevant to a system administration function, it's assumed to be Gnome unless a specific exception is made for KDE. This assumption permeates the entire Fedora ecosystem. Once again, I'm not questioning that this should be so, I'm simply stating it as a fact of life.
As for your personal feeling about GNOME? Your business. Your choice.
I'm aware of that. I didn't bring it up.
Cheers
poc
On 10/11/2009 07:48 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
Nevertheless, it remains true that Fedora is a Gnome-based distro! Why? Because it's all over the documentation. I doubt you'll find the phrase "Fedora is a Gnome-based distro" anywhere in the docs, but the fact remains that at every juncture where a DE is relevant to a system administration function, it's assumed to be Gnome unless a specific exception is made for KDE.
Any specific pointers? We can fix the documentation. You are welcome to contribute. In most cases, it is a matter of not having enough people volunteering to comprehensively document every desktop environment.
Rahul
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 10/11/2009 07:48 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
Nevertheless, it remains true that Fedora is a Gnome-based distro! Why? Because it's all over the documentation. I doubt you'll find the phrase "Fedora is a Gnome-based distro" anywhere in the docs, but the fact remains that at every juncture where a DE is relevant to a system administration function, it's assumed to be Gnome unless a specific exception is made for KDE.
Any specific pointers? We can fix the documentation. You are welcome to contribute. In most cases, it is a matter of not having enough people volunteering to comprehensively document every desktop environment.
While not exactly documentation: http://www.fedoraproject.org/en/get-fedora
Get Fedora 11 Desktop Edition Now This is the latest version of the Fedora Linux operating system featuring the GNOME desktop.
And then on the right: KDE fans, go here! Have a PowerPC? Go here! Show me all download options in one page!
Put in this way, it appears that KDE and PPC are just "supported because there are a few weird people and weird machines around".
Better replace fans with something more neutral such as "users".
BTW, why in the first two sentences the webmaster is talking and in the last one the web user is talking? Sounds stylistically unpolished.
Suggestion: Fedora with KDE Fedora for PowerPC All Fedora download options
Best regards.
On 10/11/2009 11:13 PM, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
Put in this way, it appears that KDE and PPC are just "supported because there are a few weird people and weird machines around".
Seems people try hard to find fault. However the design is changing for Fedora 12
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Website_redesign_2009
Send your feedback if any to fedora-websites list/ webmaster@fedoraproject.org.
Rahul
On 10/11/2009 10:18 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Sat, 2009-10-10 at 21:01 -0400, David wrote:
The applications have to be written in 'something'. These happen to be written in GTK. And my point was that that does not make Fedora a GNOME distribution. It appears to me that Fedora *chooses* to be a GNOME Desktop default distro.
Well, the only thing the *have* to be written in is "something that exposes the Linux API", (recalling that we're talking about system apps here). The API defines the lowest common denominator, anything else is an optional extra. However that's beside the point.
I was trying to argue that Fedora is a Gnome distro based on such considerations, but taking into account both your own and Rahul's (and Marc's) comments I can see that this argument as such doesn't hold up.
Nevertheless, it remains true that Fedora is a Gnome-based distro! Why? Because it's all over the documentation. I doubt you'll find the phrase "Fedora is a Gnome-based distro" anywhere in the docs, but the fact remains that at every juncture where a DE is relevant to a system administration function, it's assumed to be Gnome unless a specific exception is made for KDE. This assumption permeates the entire Fedora ecosystem. Once again, I'm not questioning that this should be so, I'm simply stating it as a fact of life.
As for your personal feeling about GNOME? Your business. Your choice.
I'm aware of that. I didn't bring it up.
So your point is that Fedora is a a GNOME *based* distribution taken from the Docs? I would imagine that the 'GNOME thing' you see is a result of the Doc author being familiar with GNOME and not KDE. On the help list I often see someone ask for help and get it only to find out that the first user does not use the same desktop as the second. I am sure that Fedora would be more than happy if you volunteered to write these directions from a KDE point of view. You could ask.
A source of help with this could be here.
Welcome to KDE UserBase
On Sun, 2009-10-11 at 10:57 -0400, David wrote:
So your point is that Fedora is a a GNOME *based* distribution taken from the Docs? I would imagine that the 'GNOME thing' you see is a result of the Doc author being familiar with GNOME and not KDE. On the help list I often see someone ask for help and get it only to find out that the first user does not use the same desktop as the second. I am sure that Fedora would be more than happy if you volunteered to write these directions from a KDE point of view. You could ask.
Rewriting them would simply invite a huge duplication of effort and could be difficult to keep in synch, but in many cases some gloss on the editing would do the trick. I'll keep that in mind.
A source of help with this could be here.
Welcome to KDE UserBase
I already do contribute (in a very minor way) to UserBase.
poc
On 10/11/2009 6:00 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Sun, 2009-10-11 at 10:57 -0400, David wrote:
So your point is that Fedora is a a GNOME *based* distribution taken from the Docs? I would imagine that the 'GNOME thing' you see is a result of the Doc author being familiar with GNOME and not KDE. On the help list I often see someone ask for help and get it only to find out that the first user does not use the same desktop as the second. I am sure that Fedora would be more than happy if you volunteered to write these directions from a KDE point of view. You could ask.
Rewriting them would simply invite a huge duplication of effort and could be difficult to keep in synch, but in many cases some gloss on the editing would do the trick. I'll keep that in mind.
A source of help with this could be here.
Welcome to KDE UserBase
I already do contribute (in a very minor way) to UserBase.
Really? Good for you. Next time there say 'hi' to Anne for me.
On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 3:56 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan pocallaghan@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think that contradicts anything I've said. The fact that "system applications" need parts of a specific DE (even if no actual desktop is installed) means that the distro is not DE-neutral, and once again, I don't expect it to be in the current state of the art.
By your definitions, it's impossible, current state of the art or no. It seems that as far as you're concerned, if the application is using GTK, it's a Gnome app, and if it's using QT, it's a KDE app.
So for a distribution to be DE-neutral, they'd have to write all their GUI tools using... what? wxWidgets? FLTK? Motif?
On Sat, 2009-10-10 at 16:27 -0700, Marc Wilson wrote:
On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 3:56 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan pocallaghan@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think that contradicts anything I've said. The fact that "system applications" need parts of a specific DE (even if no actual desktop is installed) means that the distro is not DE-neutral, and once again, I don't expect it to be in the current state of the art.
By your definitions, it's impossible, current state of the art or no. It seems that as far as you're concerned, if the application is using GTK, it's a Gnome app, and if it's using QT, it's a KDE app.
So for a distribution to be DE-neutral, they'd have to write all their GUI tools using... what? wxWidgets? FLTK? Motif?
I think we're drifting away from the point here, or maybe I'm not being clear about what I mean.
As an old-timer in the Unix game, I consider a GUI as an add-on. A system can work perfectly well without one (unless you want to do something specifically graphical). It may not be what most users want, but in some cases it's useful and even necessary to be able to run with no GUI at all. Being able to do this also indicates a clear separation of function between "system stuff" and "GUI stuff", which in my view ought to be maintained.
I just dislike the idea that a functional system, even in these conditions, has to have certain DE-derived libraries or apps to work properly. Given that these libraries and apps are specific to one DE, that means the distro is not DE-neutral.
poc
On 10/11/2009 05:33 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
I just dislike the idea that a functional system, even in these conditions, has to have certain DE-derived libraries or apps to work properly. Given that these libraries and apps are specific to one DE, that means the distro is not DE-neutral.
"system apps" don't use GTK depending on your definition of a system application. Many desktop apps use GTK (and several others uses QT or some other toolkit) and that doesn't make them desktop environment at all. GTK apps are written for GNOME, Xfce, LXDE etc which is a very clear demonstration of the fact that GTK apps are not desktop environment specific.
Rahul
Marc Wilson wrote:
Then step up and do the work, if you want KDE on an equal footing. It's not like the KDE people within Fedora haven't been saying this for ages and ages and ages.
It became evident a few months ago that a suggestion like yours, while certainly reasonable, is not useful.
Even if KDE were good/polished/complete enough (and it actually is), the proposal "let the user choose desktop" was replied with "we do not want the user to choose".
So, given: a) the user will not choose, we choose b) our choice is GNOME
KDE people have been unable to change a). Attacking b) is not natural to KDE people, as KDE *is* fundamentally about _choice_ (the same doesn't apply to GNOME, which is fundamentally about _pre-cooked_).
Best regards.
On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 11:01 AM, Roberto Ragusa mail@robertoragusa.it wrote:
Marc Wilson wrote:
Then step up and do the work, if you want KDE on an equal footing. It's not like the KDE people within Fedora haven't been saying this for ages and ages and ages.
It became evident a few months ago that a suggestion like yours, while certainly reasonable, is not useful.
Even if KDE were good/polished/complete enough (and it actually is), the proposal "let the user choose desktop" was replied with "we do not want the user to choose".
So, given: a) the user will not choose, we choose b) our choice is GNOME
KDE people have been unable to change a). Attacking b) is not natural to KDE people, as KDE *is* fundamentally about _choice_ (the same doesn't apply to GNOME, which is fundamentally about _pre-cooked_).
Best regards.
Roberto Ragusa mail at robertoragusa.it
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
I haven't missed a beat! what fun!
Hi;
Patrick, I am with you!
On Sat, 2009-10-10 at 09:52 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Sat, 2009-10-10 at 14:34 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Joshua C. wrote:
The installation process guides you through some basic points (like grub, partitioning, basic packages).
While I am at it, I think the partitioning options are badly put, too. The first option should be to use the current partitions, in my view. The second should be to set up partitions as one wants.
I kind of agree. I must have installed every Fedora system since FC1 and every single time I get to this question (or the equivalent in earlier versions) I have doubts about how to proceed. I almost always want to keep my existing partition scheme and just install (not update) the new Fedora version on /, preserving /home untouched, but the dialogue doesn't make it easy to understand how to do this. It would reduce installation anxiety considerably if Anaconda told me the exact consequences of each option before asking me to confirm, but for some reason every time I get to this point I find myself wondering "what does this *really* mean?".
Maybe I'm just paranoid.
Even for experienced users, some of the Anaconda choices are full of FUD. Keeping in mind, that most people don't re-partition very often, or install grub very often or burn DVD's very often or rename their machines very often, or input the addresses of their repos very often etc. etc., asking them to choose a process when their machines have been taken over by the installation process and it is too late to double check, is confusing at the best of times and infuriating when things are going wrong.
I really feel sorry for someone installing for the first time who is brand new to Linux or Fedora.
There should be explanation Buttons through out Ananconda, not written for the experienced, but for the newbie particularly somebody coming over from M$ Windows. Much of that text already exists in documentation of "Installation Notes" and "Release Notes". The problem is that those documents are unavailable when a user needs them the most.
I suspect that most people who have installed Fedora before know that it is best to avoid the crazy system suggested by Anaconda.
In the past, I have inadvertently got into one of the non-custom options and had to back out and re-start the installation. (Actually I didn't have to re-start, but I didn't know that at the time.)
Strictly speaking it *is* impossible to install Fedora without at least part of Gnome. Installing both and choosing one or the other is not difficult. Installing from a KDE-focussed download isn't hard either and is usually what I do.
There's nothing vestigial about it. Fedora is upfront about being a Gnome distro which also supports KDE. For example the upcoming DeviceKit stuff mentions Gnome components in the same breath as the kernel. This is common in Fedora docs. I gripe about it from time to time but I doubt anything can be done about it at present. The current state of free desktop architectures doesn't seem to allow neutrality.
I keep a TomBoy note ongoing in which I add a list of all of the dickey little things I have to do before and while installing the latest Fedora version. I print it out as hard copy just before each time I install. (Just in case.) Unfortunately, that list is getting longer and longer.
To me Anaconda should or could be Fedora's main sales page. When I think of the time and frustration of installing a M$ Windows OS, Fedora's installation should be reduced to a couple of Button pushes as a comparison.
On first start after installation, gpk-application should be thrust front and centre in order to pick your applications. I have a bash script that runs yum with a list of about 20 applications I want with each Fedora version. It took me a couple of weeks on Fedora 11 to discover that "Ad/remove Software" i.e.gpk-application, could quickly get me everything I wanted.
On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 8:25 AM, William Case billlinux@rogers.com wrote:
There should be explanation Buttons through out Ananconda, not written for the experienced, but for the newbie particularly somebody coming over from M$ Windows. Much of that text already exists in documentation of "Installation Notes" and "Release Notes". The problem is that those documents are unavailable when a user needs them the most.
I call bull. They are available before he starts.
Well - how about this. When Linus goes back to kde as his desktop, then maybe we should make it a simple choice
Choose your desktop:
a) Make it a surpise
b) You pick for me please
c) make it the same as Linus)
e) Windows 7 please (press Ctrl-Alt-Delete-Shift-911) Go shopping.
a) is not available and at the moment (b) and (c) are the same ..
... ;-) (<=== NB smiley)
Timothy Murphy wrote:
How many people installing Fedora for the first - or even the second - time would choose to "Customize now"? It is like saying, "If you think you are cleverer than me, press this button".
Actually, I wonder how many people installing any linux distribution for the first time knows enough to ask the questions: What is KDE? What is Gnome? And, if they don't know that...maybe they should be reading about it before they install? Or, maybe they just install thinking there is only "GUI"...without of course knowing what a "GUI" is.....
On Sat, 2009-10-10 at 12:37 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Joshua C. wrote:
I'd like to be asked during installation if I want to use Gnome or KDE or some other environment. Am I alone in this? One has to go through a slightly tortuous path to get KDE installed.
Take a look at this: http://docs.fedoraproject.org/install-guide/f11/en-US/html/sn-package-
selection.html
It's from the f11 installation guide (section software selection). Just click on "desktop environments" and choose KDE or GNOME. It's simple enough.
How many people installing Fedora for the first - or even the second - time would choose to "Customize now"?
---- probably nearly identical to the number of people who know that there's a choice of desktop managers.
Craig
-
Bill Case -
clarice oshea -
Craig White -
David -
Ed Greshko -
Genes MailLists -
Joshua C. -
Marc Wilson -
Patrick O'Callaghan -
Rahul Sundaram -
Roberto Ragusa -
Timothy Murphy -
Valent Turkovic