One of the many benefits of FOSS is that users can contribute - even if 
it's just writing tickets on the issue tracker.

On Wednesday, 15 June 2016 08:11:54 UTC+1, Drew White wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> Please, do not take this whole thing the wrong way.
> It will seem like it is sounding the way it is not sounding, just because 
> of the way
> it is put together. It's all things that I find need to be looked into, 
> things that I know
> need to be fixed, and that I have fixed on my local.
> Hopefully you will understand where I'm coming from and understand this 
> the way I
> intend for it to be understood, and not the way you will most likely take 
> it.
>
>
>
> When will Dom0 be updated to a recent version of something?
>
> If this was CentOS for Dom0 then there would not be this update issue 
> where Fedora
> removes the packages and repositories for their "obsolete" operating 
> systems, and
> you wouldn't have a useless Dom0 that one couldn't get updates for.
>
> This is the problem with Fedora. CentOS is heading the same way slowly 
> after version 7.
>
> But at least they have long term updates and stable system that doesn't 
> have
> invalid repositories after a few months.
>
> Please change the way things are done so that they work long term, not 
> short term.
>
> Or else have a workaround for things to work properly over a long period 
> of time.
>
> Another thing, please get the menu structuring and naming correct, that 
> way we don't
> have to alter your code to make the menus correct.
>
> With Windows HVM Templates and AppVMs wether they are standalone or not, 
> why
> do you have the menus the way they are? Why not build the tools to build 
> the menu
> correctly instead of us having to edit EVERY menu item to get it the way 
> it should
> have been built?
>
> Why is the networking so difficult?
> I have my DNS server set to the parent virtual (proxyvm or netvm) which 
> has the main
> DNS server as the one that's on the network acting as the DNS server, but 
> the
> virtuals can't find it, unless I specify it explicitly.
>
> Why is it that the Qubes-Windows-Tools almost never work?
> Why is it that the tools never set up the screens right?
> Why does it set it up as ONE screen, instead of multiple screens when I 
> use 2+ monitors?
>          (This is the reason you are having the issue and bug that you 
> have with the tools on
>             large displays)
>
> When reading https://github.com/QubesOS/qubes-issues/issues/1870
> There are some good ideas, and some that aren't really good at all.
>
> https://github.com/QubesOS/qubes-issues/issues/1870#issuecomment-223055937
> If THAT is what the manager will be like, it has no structure, no layout 
> that is understandable,
> it is designed to be "*wanky*" and not *functional*.
>
> Your current manager needs only altering to work better, and adding onto 
> it. Not a facelift to
> make it look like crap.
>
> The installer doesn't allow for multiple HDDs to be used. It just decides 
> that all HDDs are 1 HDD.
> If I select the smaller HDD that the O/S is going on, and the drive I want 
> /var/lib/qubes to go on,
> then it sets them up as one hdd and just wants me to assign space.
> But that's not what I want. The one that will have the virtuals on it is a 
> mirrored drive, to
> keep my virtuals protected.
> I don't want half of the virtual to be on the main drive and the other 
> half to be on a mirrored drive
> because then if my primary drive dies I won't have the first part of the 
> virtual, only the second.
> That's pretty useless to me.
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"qubes-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/qubes-users/67e655bd-2013-460e-8653-a2e4f3bc9aaf%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to