Originally posted by 144Hz
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Fedora's 32-bit ARM Xfce Image Demoted While Fedora Workstation AArch64 Gets Promoted
Collapse
X
-
- Likes 1
-
Originally posted by Britoid View PostI wouldn't call Fedora and OpenSUSE commercial distros. Both are run by communities, although sponsored by commercial companies.
OpenWrt? Never cared, they had exfat kernel driver available since it was leaked in their official repositories, and so on.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Britoid View Post
If you want to use GNOME Shell with a Windows-like workflow, then yes its going to be unusable because it doesn't use that workflow. GNOME Shell proudly doesn't use that workflow.
Regarding Red Shift, this is built into the compositors/desktops now, so it isn't needed anymore.
What if we like XFCE or OS9 interfaces? Because Gnome proudly doesn't do those either
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by AdamW View Post
I mean...obviously having to test it is a bias, but a lot of the stuff in Fedora's KDE spin is stuff that is just really not *necessary* at all. Stuff like...I don't know how many there are right now (at least two), but it's shipped three different package managers on the live image in the past. Because, I dunno, choice! or something? So that means we get to test not one but three package managers. And block the release if any one of them is broken. Fedora KDE ships Konqueror, Firefox, Krusader *and* Dolphin, all on the live image. It ships a 'TNEF file viewer', which means if you're trying to do the job properly you need to have a TNEF file lying around somewhere and know what it's supposed to look like. It ships QDbusViewer in the frickin' app menus, for some reason. It ships an Automatic Mouse Clicker?
The KDE control panel has controls for *every goddamn thing in the world*, even things that make absolutely no sense whatsoever. I think they finally fixed this, but it's still my favourite example: at one point it had a setting for the xkb geometry. The *only* thing that actually affects is how xkb draws a little illustration of a keyboard layout if you ask it to...but KDE didn't actually *use* xkb to draw little illustrations of keyboards, it did it itself, and it ignored that setting! So it was literally entirely useless. The general KDE approach to making a configuration GUI is 'take literally every possible setting from the underlying config file and expose it as flexibly as possible'. This is a freaking nightmare for testing. Keyboard config is still the best example of this - there is a checkbox in the KDE keyboard config thing marked "Maintain key compatibility with old Solaris keycodes". Is this *really* a thing the GUI needs to expose? There are *eight separate choices* for "Numeric keypad Delete behavior". These are all things that someone, somewhere in the world needs to set (or needed to set sometime in 2003, sometimes), I guess, but do we really need a checkbox for every damn one? In the main KDE control center?
Anyway, yeah. This is why we maybe don't want to be on the hook for absolutely everything in KDE working any more.
There are 16 Caps Lock key options too. One can argue that 16 Caps Lock options aren't necessary unless you're like me and actually use one. I use the additional Backspace setting and have both Shifts at set to activate Caps Lock. And yes, even though I think 14 people in the world, tops, use the setting, Solaris keycode compatibility is a setting a GUI should expose. The alternatives of "edit a text file" or "cryptic terminal commands" is beyond most people...heck...today I watched first-hand how Chrome plugins are beyond the average person...but the GUI is needed because those alternatives are why Linux has that hard to use stereotype. It's either that or become like Gnome and just don't have that many options...and make people install options through a browser and hope it all jives together...at least it's an option, but still...
That said, it wouldn't be a bad idea for Nate to run a few polls on some of those more obscure settings to find out what is and isn't used or needed.
I do think that the KDE control panel is a straight up cluster. Like the Shortcuts menu under Workspace. It should be a tab between Layouts and Advanced on the Keyboard Menu under Input Devices. Then you have distros like Manjaro that add their own stuff to it...and I'll go off on a rant so I'll just say it's crap like shortcuts to crap that exists in the damn control panel, some doubled up efforts (some are arguable better than the KDE defaults, others worse), and their kernel installer tool...maybe that systemd entry too...but all the crap Manjaro adds makes the control panel more clustered up and annoying.
IMHO, the trick with KDE/Plasma isn't adding all the KDE and Plasma applications, it's knowing what not to add while adding all of their suggested or optional dependencies of what gets used.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Spooktra View PostIt's sad to see what Fedora has become. Back when it was just Red Hat, it was fantastic, probably the best distro, especially with the Ximian Desktop, those were the days. Then when Fedora was announced, I remember reading an article on a Linux review site, where the author said something to the effect of "I just hope Fedora isn't meant as a perpetually beta test bed for main Red Hat releases".
The man was incredibly prescient.
What do you get by beta-testing Windows 10? Automatic reinstalls of Candy Crush Saga and privacy settings reset? And you still have to pay for it.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post
I didn't even want to bring up the point, more of a personal opinion point, that Gnome is almost unusable to me without a few plugins. I can manage, but it isn't what I'd call an enjoyable experience. Add a few plugins, tweak a few new settings, and I'm a relatively happy camper. At that point I might as well be using Plasma since it has the look, feel, and settings I think a desktop needs all OOTB (or at least available...like some distributions not including red shift/anit-blue OOTB..whatever TF that term is called).
Regarding Red Shift, this is built into the compositors/desktops now, so it isn't needed anymore.
- Likes 1
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by skeevy420 View PostAnd that last part about KDE makes me sad. Good KDE coverage is the most important aspect of a distribution to me and why SUSE Tumbleweed and Manjaro KDE have become my go-to distributions...only I don't care for the way SUSE does things and Manjaro is pushing crap too fast for their own good. \
One can argue that Gnome shipping less stuff and being easier to test initially as a bad thing for the long term -- by that I mean that including less software means the end-user will have to install more software to get a complete system which then adds more complexity and issues for bug fixers, quality assurance, etc -- Pay a little bit more now or pay a lot more later.
The KDE control panel has controls for *every goddamn thing in the world*, even things that make absolutely no sense whatsoever. I think they finally fixed this, but it's still my favourite example: at one point it had a setting for the xkb geometry. The *only* thing that actually affects is how xkb draws a little illustration of a keyboard layout if you ask it to...but KDE didn't actually *use* xkb to draw little illustrations of keyboards, it did it itself, and it ignored that setting! So it was literally entirely useless. The general KDE approach to making a configuration GUI is 'take literally every possible setting from the underlying config file and expose it as flexibly as possible'. This is a freaking nightmare for testing. Keyboard config is still the best example of this - there is a checkbox in the KDE keyboard config thing marked "Maintain key compatibility with old Solaris keycodes". Is this *really* a thing the GUI needs to expose? There are *eight separate choices* for "Numeric keypad Delete behavior". These are all things that someone, somewhere in the world needs to set (or needed to set sometime in 2003, sometimes), I guess, but do we really need a checkbox for every damn one? In the main KDE control center?
Anyway, yeah. This is why we maybe don't want to be on the hook for absolutely everything in KDE working any more.
- Likes 4
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by NotMine999 View Post
Considering there is no post by "144Hz" above that of "tildearrow"...
I wonder if this is an open admission that there is a moderator present in these forums ... other than Michael and perhaps his wife.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Britoid View Post
Less extensions more apps is actually something that comes up in the GNOME-sphere a lot.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post
I was just referring to how I read "downward spiral" in the context of that user's post and not my actual thoughts on Fedora. Between Fedora and Red Hat, lots of interesting stuff coming out these days and "downward spiral" wouldn't be my first description. I could have made those points a little more clear (I thought adding "at least that's the way I read it" was enough).
But I do appreciate the response and had a chuckle about y'all making the same (suggestively bad) decision I'd have made in the same situation -- go with XFCE.
And that last part about KDE makes me sad. Good KDE coverage is the most important aspect of a distribution to me and why SUSE Tumbleweed and Manjaro KDE have become my go-to distributions...only I don't care for the way SUSE does things and Manjaro is pushing crap too fast for their own good. \
For Manjaro, a distribution with a focus on ZFS should not push Linux 5.5 until they update their ZoL base to a git revision with Linux 5.5+ support or they should sit their happy ass on Linux 5.4 until the next ZoL release that includes Linux 5.5 support is released. Or if I didn't read my damn logs this morning I'd have rebooted into a non-working system. I have a feeling that bullshit like that doesn't usually happen with Fedora.
One can argue that Gnome shipping less stuff and being easier to test initially as a bad thing for the long term -- by that I mean that including less software means the end-user will have to install more software to get a complete system which then adds more complexity and issues for bug fixers, quality assurance, etc -- Pay a little bit more now or pay a lot more later.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: