Re: What does Emacs Keybinding theme do?
AFAIK, it basically affects text-input areas. It definitely works there though; I'd go crazy otherwise... :] -miles -- Most attacks seem to take place at night, during a rainstorm, uphill, where four map sheets join. -- Anon. British Officer in WW I -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87txm6jfjg@catnip.gol.com
usomething stealing Ctrl-Space
[reposted here; not sure what the right mailing list is...] As of today, the Control-Space key combination is no longer being passed through to any apps, in particular, gnome-terminal and Emacs. As this is a very important Emacs key-combination, this makes using Emacs difficult... I'm not sure at all where to look for the problem, but I notice gnome-shell got updated yesterday, and it would certainly be in a position to steal keys. I also use mozc for Japanese input, which I notice is no longer working This may be relevant, because I think the default enable key for mozc is Ctrl-Space, but I had changed it to Shift-Space instead. I cannot verify this that my change is still active, however, as the settings command in the mozc menu [in the little icon in the screen title bar] now does nothing... Anybody have any idea what's up? Thanks, -miles -- 永日の 澄んだ紺から 永遠へ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ip5voefh@catnip.gol.com
Re: getting rid of the gnome-shell network-manager dependency
Michael Biebl bi...@debian.org writes: I'm a little confused by this ... since this fix seems to be in NM, does this mean that network-manager still needs to be installed, but This fix was in libnm-glib4, and libnm-glib4 needs to be installed as gnome-shell links against it. I see. Ok, I tried today, and removed NM, and everything does indeed seem to work properly now. Thanks for you help! -miles -- Custard, n. A vile concoction produced by a malevolent conspiracy of the hen, the cow, and the cook. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/buovclev692@dhlpc061.dev.necel.com
getting rid of the gnome-shell network-manager dependency
Any idea when gnome-shell will be fixed to not depend on network-manager being installed? [gnome-shell dies at startup unless network-manager is installed, but network-manager interacts very badly with NFS, so installing NM is at best a painful workaround...] Thanks, -Miles -- Suburbia: where they tear out the trees and then name streets after them. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87fwcj28l5@catnip.gol.com
Re: getting rid of the gnome-shell network-manager dependency
Michael Biebl bi...@debian.org writes: Any idea when gnome-shell will be fixed to not depend on network-manager being installed? yesterday Hmm, it still wasn't fixed in my update today ... maybe it hasn't percolated through to the mirror I use? [gnome-shell dies at startup unless network-manager is installed, but network-manager interacts very badly with NFS, so installing NM is at best a painful workaround...] Instead of posting here, you could have checked the BTS I did check the BTS, though a few days ago (which is where I found out about the install-NM workaround). Thanks, -miles -- Un-American, adj. Wicked, intolerable, heathenish. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/874nsz1tfp@catnip.gol.com
stop gnome3 from auto-mounting usb devices?
How can I stop gnome 3 from auto-mounting USB devices when they are inserted? [e.g. I plug my ipod into the computer with a USB cable] This didn't happen before I upgraded to gnome 3, and gnome is popping up a big dialog asking what want to do, so I guess it has something to do with gnome3. [I never want anything auto-mounted, ever.] Thanks, -Miles -- x y Z! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/buo4nvt5p2o@dhlpc061.dev.necel.com
Re: stop gnome3 from auto-mounting usb devices?
Michael Biebl bi...@debian.org writes:
How can I stop gnome 3 from auto-mounting USB devices when they are
inserted? [e.g. I plug my ipod into the computer with a USB cable]
$ gsettings list-recursively | grep mount
org.gnome.desktop.media-handling automount true
org.gnome.desktop.media-handling automount-open false
$ gsettings set org.gnome.desktop.media-handling automount false
If you want to hide/ignore particular devices/partitions, you can do
that via udev rules, e.g. I have:
$ cat /etc/udev/rules.d/99-hide-partitions.rules
KERNEL==sda1,ENV{UDISKS_PRESENTATION_HIDE}=1
You can use arbitrary rules to refine the match for the device.
Thanks!
-miles
--
Most attacks seem to take place at night, during a rainstorm, uphill,
where four map sheets join. -- Anon. British Officer in WW I
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/buoehuwgtdt@dhlpc061.dev.necel.com
remove resize handle in gnome-terminal 3?
Is there a way to remove the triangular resize handle that gnome-terminal 3 puts at the bottom-right of every window? [gnome-terminal 2 didn't have this.] It looks bad, and annoyingly obscures text, especially with small fonts (as the handle doesn't track the font-size). For instance, running aptitude, the percentage complete number in the bottom-line progress bar is largely obscured! I looked in the terminal settings menu, but there doesn't seem to be an option to turn it off. Thanks, -Miles -- We live, as we dream -- alone -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/buozkkjev51@dhlpc061.dev.necel.com
Re: remove resize handle in gnome-terminal 3?
Michel Dänzer daen...@debian.org writes: I looked in the terminal settings menu, but there doesn't seem to be an option to turn it off. It sounds like you have the scrollbar disabled or on the left side? You could enable it on the right side as a workaround. Yeah, scrollbar's disabled ... don't really want to enable it though; gnome-terminal nicely has essentially zero extraneous widgets with everything disabled (except for this thing now). Should I file a bug report about that widget? -Miles -- Bride, n. A woman with a fine prospect of happiness behind her. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87hb6r1s68@catnip.gol.com
Re: Can't smoothly type in gnome-terminal
Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org writes: [Argh, even though I'm the original bug reporter for #631116, I didn't get any of the email followups...] No, this is because of #434257. The debbugs developers don’t want to fix Argh... As mentioned in the bug log, SCIM doesn’t provide a GTK3 module. Hmm, shouldn't the failure mode be a bit more graceful though? E.g., simply ignoring SCIM, but correctly allowing normal input? [Right now, it randomly eats characters, even for simple ASCII keyboard input when SCIM input isn't active.] Thanks, -Miles -- One of the lessons of history is that nothing is often a good thing to do, and always a clever thing to say. -- Will Durant -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/8762nfsbye@catnip.gol.com
Re: Can't smoothly type in gnome-terminal
Chris bbsh...@gmail.com writes: According to a reply to bug #631116, installing ibus-gtk3 solved the typing issue for me. But the bad style is still here. A reboot makes no difference. [Argh, even though I'm the original bug reporter for #631116, I didn't get any of the email followups, so I didn't seem those replies until you mentioned them! Some stupid spam filter crap no doubt... Spammers ... must die] That solves it for me too: env -u XMODIFIERS gnome-terminal ... of course that means I can't use SCIM in gnome-terminal, ... not such a big deal really, but no doubt I'll sometime want to use it in a program I start _from_ a gnome-terminal, and forget to re-set XMODIFIERS... bleah... So what exactly is gnome-terminal screwing up here...? Why does disabling SCIM solve it? Thanks, -Miles -- Neighbor, n. One whom we are commanded to love as ourselves, and who does all he knows how to make us disobedient. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/buoiprhnzl4@dhlpc061.dev.necel.com
Re: gnome-terminal 3.0 already in Unstable?
Tshepang Lekhonkhobe tshep...@gmail.com writes: Was it a mistake that GNOME 3's gnome-terminal got uploaded to Sid? I say it because a lot of the stuff is still in Experimental, and the it looks out-of-place (the theme) with the rest of Sid GNOME desktop. ... and at least for me, gnome-terminal 3.x is so flaky that it's unusable (I don't know if it's a direct problem with gnome-terminal's fault, or some library it depends on, but it happened with the upgrade to 3.x). [I reported the bug: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=631116 ] -Miles -- Don't just question authority, Don't forget to question me. -- Jello Biafra -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87vcvsli5f@catnip.gol.com
Re: gnome 3 minimize button (etc)
Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org writes: What's convincing? I mean, maximize isn't too much of an issue -- double-clicking on the title bar seems reasonably convenient and intuitive -- but making minimize inconvenient _is_ an issue, especially since there doesn't seem to be a good reason for doing so. With GNOME Shell there’s nowhere to minimize the window too. It would just make it disappear, which would be nonsense. Hm, ok, so you're saying with gnome shell. I probably won't want to use gnome shell anyway, so I guess that's not such a problem. Anyway, my original question was about metacity: will it still have the buttons? If MC continues to have the buttons, then that will be a good alternative for people that don't like the new paradigm. Don’t try to apply the GNOME 2 paradigm to GNOME 3, it’s just different. You can like it or not, but know what you’re talking about before calling people insane. I wasn't really calling them insane, I was saying that was the general tone of web-scuttlebutt about this change (There's a lot of talk recently about the gnome devs going insane and removing the minimize and maximize buttons in gnome 3.). -Miles -- (\(\ (^.^) ()) *This is the cute bunny virus, please copy this into your sig so it can spread. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/8762rt41hi@catnip.gol.com
Re: gnome 3 minimize button (etc)
hob...@poukram.net (Rémi Letot) writes: They didn't go insane, thanks. Thats a matter of opinion. They just changed the default way to do it, and they didn't remove the possibility to revert the change. And having used it for a few days, I must say it's quite convincing. What's convincing? I mean, maximize isn't too much of an issue -- double-clicking on the title bar seems reasonably convenient and intuitive -- but making minimize inconvenient _is_ an issue, especially since there doesn't seem to be a good reason for doing so. -Miles -- Run away! Run away! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87pqq24bv0@catnip.gol.com
gnome 3 minimize button (etc)
There's a lot of talk recently about the gnome devs going insane and removing the minimize and maximize buttons in gnome 3. Anyone know if this is only when using the gnome shell, or does it apply to metacity too? -Miles -- Bore, n. A person who talks when you wish him to listen. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87lj0r7piu@catnip.gol.com
Re: gnome 3 minimize button (etc)
Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net writes: They didn't go insane, thanks. Anyone know if this is only when using the gnome shell, or does it apply to metacity too? ...but what about metacity? -miles -- Alliance, n. In international politics, the union of two thieves who have their hands so deeply inserted in each other's pockets that they cannot separately plunder a third. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87aah77o9p@catnip.gol.com
Re: GNOME 3 and panel applets
David Weinehall t...@debian.org writes: This is only partially correct though. gnome-panel will remain, but in a heavily modified state -- the intention for the GNOME 3 version of gnome-panel is having it as a fallback in case gnome-shell isn't supported, and thus a lot of features will be gutted or altered to ensure that it behaves as similar as possible to gnome-shell. People who have been expressing concern about this have, reasonably enough, been told that gnome-panel 2.32 is probably what they really want. Are there any plans to provide this package? Are any of panel apps from gnome alternative gtk-using environments suitable? I periodically try out the panels from things like lxde, but so far they've been noticeably less nice than gnome-panel. If they continue to improve though, maybe a mix of gnome and non-gnome could be a reasonable gtk centric alternative to gnome's increasing wackiness? -miles -- Advice, n. The smallest current coin. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87vczv67r5@catnip.gol.com
Re: Recent upgrade in Lenny botched CJK fonts
Anthony Fok f...@debian.org writes: Also highly recommended is the recently updated Unifont: xfonts-unifont and ttf-unifont. The version of ttf-unifont in debian currently (5.1.20080914) doesn't actually seem to be a scalable font, despite being in ttf format -- it's really just a fixed bitmap that gets magnified. Is there a newer version which is better? -Miles -- Advice, n. The smallest current coin. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Recent upgrade in Lenny botched CJK fonts
Osamu Aoki os...@debian.org writes: The version of ttf-unifont in debian currently (5.1.20080914) doesn't actually seem to be a scalable font, despite being in ttf format -- it's really just a fixed bitmap that gets magnified. Looking like fixed bitmap is not proof of being bitmap data. This is scalable TTF font data. Right, but the actual _shapes_ of all the glyphs I looked at (including ASCII and CJK glyphs) are clearly mechanically generated from bitmaps, and as a result, look fairly awful at any size other than the original design size -Miles -- Barometer, n. An ingenious instrument which indicates what kind of weather we are having. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Font problem after upgrading gnome-control-center
Amir Tabatabaei [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I don't doubt that this is the right way but I do doubt that its not user friendly as some will get an ugly display like I got earlier today. And they might not know where to ask for help and/or how to solve it. If the default is to assume (incorrectly) 96dpi, users with other types of display will see an incorrect display. Since regardless of what the default is, some users will get an ugly display until they change the setting, they may as well pick the least incorrect default, which is apparently what they did. -Miles -- We are all lying in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars. -Oscar Wilde -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
gnome-panel pixmap usage
I recently found out about xresmap (basically top for X server resources), so I ran it to see why my memory is getting sucked up so quickly these days. To my surprise, the major offender was not firefox (the usual suspect these days :-), but rather gnome-panel -- it seems to be using 85 MB of pixmaps! Here's the output: res-base Wins GCs Fnts Pxms Misc Pxm mem Other Total PID Identifier 100 132 330 1425 10585237K 6K 85244K 2876 gnome-panel 180 353 491 456 36617700K 19K 17719K 10580 firefox 16078 311 155 88 7810K 5K 7815K 8828 gqview 200 217 611 43 93 2399K 9K 2409K 7046 gtk-window-dec 22019117 851 1738K 21K 1759K ? compiz 0e0 9 521 18 54 1099K 3K 1103K 10569 gnome-terminal ... [I hand-edited the Identifier column, as the original had charset issues; the names now are based on the PID and what ps says.] So does anybody have a clue why gnome-panel would be using so much pixmap memory? Does it have known pixmap leaks? I thought maybe it had something to do with my background wallpaper, so I replaced it with a single-color background, and that didn't affect the number by more than a few KB. Oh, the gnome-panel version is 2.18.3-2. Thanks, -Miles -- Fast, small, soon; pick any 2. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: gnome-panel pixmap usage
Loïc Minier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Thu, Sep 20, 2007, Miles Bader wrote: So does anybody have a clue why gnome-panel would be using so much pixmap memory? Does it have known pixmap leaks? Perhaps one of your applet leaks pixmaps; if you graph it over time, or simply compare the values after restarting gnome-panel, you might tell for sure whether it's a leak. I've been watching the value, and it seems to be increasing, but only slowly (now, for instance, it's 88MB instead of 85MB). This X session was started about a week ago, so I guess even a slow leak might have reached 85MB by now... Do applets in the panel generally share the same (gnome-panel) process/x-window? I've noticed some applets seem to show up as separate processes with their own xrestop entry, e.g., I see the following in xrestop: 120 8 300 37 17 849K 1K850K 2889 multiload-applet 140 5 270 31 15 491K 1K492K 2891 mixer_applet2 Other than those two, all I have is pretty standard stuff: * The gnome menu button * 4 launcher icons * The task list * The standard clock/date display Ok -- I just did killall gnome-panel and the new gnome-panel seems to be using much less pixmap memory: now it's using about 3 MB. I'll watch it for a while, but it's certainly smelling like a leak to me at the moment Thanks, -Miles -- Any man who is a triangle, has thee right, when in Cartesian Space, to have angles, which when summed, come to know more, nor no less, than nine score degrees, should he so wish. [TEMPLE OV THEE LEMUR]
Re: gnome-panel pixmap usage
David Weinehall [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ok -- I just did killall gnome-panel and the new gnome-panel seems to be using much less pixmap memory: now it's using about 3 MB. I'll watch it for a while, but it's certainly smelling like a leak to me at the moment 3MB still sounds a lot; according to xrestop, my gnome-panel(s) (one on top, one at the bottom) uses a bit more than 500k, and that's with screensaver applet, fast user switch, gnome menu, 5 launchers, system monitor, desktop switcher, volume applet, weather applet, zeroconf discovery, clock/date, notification area, window selector, and show desktop button. Do you have evolution installed? It might be the evolution-date/time coupling that causes the leak (guessing wildly here). No... I don't even have a desktop or anything, just basic usage. Are gtk themes powerful enough to leak pixmaps? Maybe it's my theme? Thanks, -Miles -- Occam's razor split hairs so well, I bought the whole argument! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Installation Report for Sarge
Michael Banck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Why would you remove the terminal starter? It's very useful. It's also very confusing when you've never seen one. Just exactly what is this confusing? If there were _lots_ of weird system icons on the taskbar (as you facetiously suggest below), _that_ could be a problem, because it would obscure more basic functions; but that's not what I'm arguing for, I'm arguing for _one_, the terminal. If you don't know what it is, and you accidentally launch it or launch it from curiosity, there's no harm done -- you can just close the window (something this sort of person probably can do). We should encourage people to become familiar with all aspects of their system -- So that means we should add Icons for all aspects of the system to the top panel? Oh please. The command line is _important_ in debian, far more so than lots of other random features. The ratio of usefulness to complexity/danger is far higher for it than for most other aspects of the system. I've dealt with people that are used to windows and don't know what the command line is, and they're typically quite thrilled with some of the things you can do by typing some simple command in a terminal. Not that they're constructing complicated pipelines off the bat, but the basic concept simply doesn't seem to be a problem. A typical example is: If you want to install some package you heard about, type aptitude install FOO -- they _love_ that. and the command line is very empowering in debian. Of course. But if you just want to browse the web, read/write mail or listen to music, you don't need it. ... and the presence of a single button on taskbar doesn't hurt you either. Did the 3rd party usability study actually recommend that? Did they give reasons? Who was the study by, and what sort of users did they look at? http://www.userinstinct.com/viewpost.php?postid=gnome26review They make the recommendation you cite, but give no justification for it, and the user surveys they give don't note any problems related to the terminal (other than user XX discovered the terminal, and didn't know what it was -- doesn't exactly sound like a big deal!). -Miles -- /\ /\ (^.^) ()) *This is the cute kitty virus, please copy it into your sig so it can spread.
Re: Installation Report for Sarge
Ross Burton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A typical example is: If you want to install some package you heard about, type aptitude install FOO -- they _love_ that. Or point them at Synaptic Package Manager in the Applications menu, and they get to point and click without having to remember the aptitude keystrokes when they don't know what they want. No, the point was that just invoking it from the terminal was in many cases _easier_ to explain than any of these package managers (synaptic, the last time I used it was particularly weird, but admittedly that was a long time ago). This is especially true when one is doing the explaining over the phone. Personally I use the terminal all day in GNOME, but I feel that it should be removed as people who don't know what a terminal is will be very, very confused by it. Y'all keep saying people will get _confused_, but nobody ever actually says what that means, or what the actual problem is. Even for people that are simply too dim/hidebound to ever learn to use a terminal, how exactly does having that button there confuse them, or make their life more difficult? If they click on it accidentally, it's ... a window -- they know about those. It has a close button -- they know about those too. It doesn't look particularly threatening. Clicking around without a mouse won't be all that useful, but neither is it harmful or frightening. Dollars to donuts that even this particularly skittish class of users will simply get bored after a while and close the window; gosh what a horrid blow to their user experience _that_ was! Having _lots_ of icons with obscure meanigns could be harmful, because they can obscure the icons are more obvious, but just _one_ is a quite different story. -Miles -- Is it true that nothing can be known? If so how do we know this? -Woody Allen
Re: Installation Report for Sarge
Michael Banck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 8. Add a starter for epiphany and evolution to the top panel and remove the starter for gnome-terminal (this was also suggested in a recent 3rd party usability study of GNOME) Why would you remove the terminal starter? It's very useful. We should encourage people to become familiar with all aspects of their system -- and the command line is very empowering in debian. Did the 3rd party usability study actually recommend that? Did they give reasons? Who was the study by, and what sort of users did they look at? -Miles -- Yo mama's so fat when she gets on an elevator it HAS to go down.
Re: File open dialog: Where is my tab extension
Rob Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The file selector in Gnome 2.4 *worked* and thus needed NO rewrite. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!! You and Ali Akcaagac deserve each other. Oh please; you rightfully got on my case about being obnoxious, but please follow your own advice. It's well-known that lots people had problems with the old file-selection dialogue, but it's clearly pretty subjective -- and frankly I kinda agree with q-funk: the new dialogue is harder to use, much slower, and generally more annoying for me. -Miles -- `There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.'
Re: File open dialog: Where is my tab extension
Miles Bader [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It's well-known that lots people had problems with the old file-selection dialogue, but it's clearly pretty subjective -- and frankly I kinda agree with q-funk: the new dialogue is harder to use, much slower, and generally more annoying for me. Oh, just as a postscript, obviously the new dialogue does incorporate some great features, in particular the customizable common places list. It's the changes to the basic functionality that are annoying. -Miles -- Ich bin ein Virus. Mach' mit und kopiere mich in Deine .signature.
Re: File open dialog: Where is my tab extension
Rob Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Such rambling is more than unproductive; it actually causes severe injury to free software because few people enjoy being abused in this way. Always treat any posting to a public mailing list as though the developer you're criticizing were reading it; it's quite likely that this is indeed the case. You are right, and I apologize for my rude manner. -Miles -- We are all lying in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars. -Oscar Wilde
Re: File open dialog: Where is my tab extension
Michael Banck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Or that the respective widget is not there by default? This is deliberate design choice by upstream, based on their usability experts. IMHO, Debian should not revert this. Oh yeah, usability experts. Silly me, they _obviously_ know what I want more than I do! Or that you cannot configure it easily via the Desktop-Preferences? This is another design choice by upstream. And a correct one I think. An idiotic one actually. But the usability experts said it was OK, so who am I to argue? Everyone knows that one size fits all. -Miles -- We live, as we dream -- alone
Re: File open dialog: Where is my tab extension
Michael Banck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Because pressing Ctr+L is not an agreable solution. Ah, so it is not about missing or broken tab-completion at all. I'll stop wasting my time at this point. Actually TAB completion is _also_ pretty flaky (at least in the new file selection dialogue)... -Miles -- Occam's razor split hairs so well, I bought the whole argument!
Re: File open dialog: Where is my tab extension
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have long since acknowledged that any real sanity and innovation is coming from the GNOME people and *not* Debian. We just package up their stuff and make sure the underlying kernel and GNU userland work. So I believe your remarks here are quite off the limit. The new gnome way means that we are not supposed to use deep directory structures, and that we should not use tab completition. Is this the maintain user satisfaction by pruning your userbase strategy? Are there any interesting forks of Gnome around? -Miles -- `The suburb is an obsolete and contradictory form of human settlement'
Re: File open dialog: Where is my tab extension
Ondej Sur [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: And? That's your opinion and it doesn't change anything if you flood debian-gtk-gnome list. Go to talk to gnome-usability list as it was mentioned earlier in discussion. Yeah, but that's like going right down and busting into the bad guys' hideout straight-away; you gotta give a man time to work up his courage... :-/ -Miles -- I'm beginning to think that life is just one long Yoko Ono album; no rhyme or reason, just a lot of incoherent shrieks and then it's over. --Ian Wolff
Re: File open dialog: Where is my tab extension
Michael Banck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do you really think you will make ... the Debian GNOME Team change the way upstream GNOME behaves in a major way? Why not? Debian already did some dialogue-box futzing, with the GTK open dialogue. If it were the case that (1) There was a Gnome `feature' that a large portion of Debian's user-base didn't like (2) Gnome refused to address the issue (perhaps because they viewed their user-base as being something different), (3) a reasonable method existed to make such a change (I've heard rumors that the new open dialogue is somewhat more pluggable), and (4) someone did the work, then ... why not? -Miles -- 97% of everything is grunge
Re: File open dialog: Where is my tab extension
Jon Colverson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Have you tried pressing Ctrl-L in the new file selector? Is that a suitable substitute for the old behaviour? The new C-l behavior is kind of cranky (and quite slow, due to all the dynamic updating of stuff) -- sometimes hitting TAB pops up a completion list, sometimes it doesn't, sometimes it completes, sometimes TAB goes to the next button ... Also, since really I just want to hit C-l, and the normal dialogue box just sits there uselessly, it'd be nice if it could just automatically pop up the C-l dialogue box _only_, from the start. -Miles -- `To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems' --Homer J. Simpson
Re: ~/.Xmodmap and Gnome
Amir [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I thought that this mailing-list would be the right place for my question, too!? The only mysterious thing is that ~/.Xmodmap works fine with kde, but gnome ignores it and says that I have to use the keyboard preferences to restore it, but in my keyboard preferences I can only find Layouts and Layout options and non of them makes it possible to include my ~/.Xmodmap. FWIW, I have the same sort of problems: Gnome keyboard handling seems to break differently with each release. I can't find _any_ way to make the current unstable version automatically install my preferred key remappings; previous Gnome versions at least allowed one to put a call to xmodmap in .gnomerc or .xsession, but that doesn't work anymore (other stuff in there is fine, so I guess gnome-session or somebody actively _resets_ keyboard mappings), and .Xmodmap is ignored. The `user friendly' stuff which is apparently supposed to replace xmodmap seems quite inadequate, but perhaps it's a documentation problem; can anybody give a recipe for doing _arbitrary_ key-remappings in current unstable Gnome? My current (annoying) work-around is just to invoke xmodmap by hand once I've logged it -- but for some reason I must invoke it _twice_ for it to really take! Hopefully it's not another case of the Gnome screw-anybody-but-grandma philosophy... -Miles -- Freedom's just another word, for nothing left to lose --Janis Joplin
Re: debian menu in gnome's Applications menu
Marcos Pinto [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: then provide a separate package without it coded in for people who dont want/need the debian menu. did you read why i wanted it gone in the first place? debian needs to address such uses Why? It's pretty bizarre request (just because your boss says it's `confusing' doesn't mean it's actually confusing). -Miles -- We have met the enemy, and he is us. -- Pogo
Re: 2.6 Keyboard capplet
Luis M [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: When I upgraded on of my machines to 2.6 the first time I logged in it informed me that my xmodmap file would be ignored, and to use the keyboard capplet. Same here, and I'm glad Gnome 2.6 does this :-) The `keyboard capplet' I see (I'm using Gnome 2.6 from experimental) doesn't look very useful though -- it basically allows you to change a few modifier type things and select your keyboard type from a list (my keyboard, of course, isn't on the list :-( ), but seems to offer no way of doing any real key rebinding. Using xmodmap, I knew how to do key rebinding, and could even use the `xkeycaps' program to make it easy, but the new xkb infrastructure seems crazily complicated and hard to understand, so I'm not sure what the hell I'm supposed to do (the docs are typical X docs -- full of every detail, but almost no high-level guidance). I suppose xmodmap was also cryptic, but at least it was familiar. So is there any reasonably simple way to rebind a key in the new order? [FWIW, what I want to do is make Shift-ESC yield asciitilde.] Thanks, -Miles -- Whatever you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do it. Mahatma Gandhi
Re: New buttons in GTK filesel
Aaron Lehmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: + use the new file selector (Closes: #203677, #201429, #201507). Seeing this in action was quite disappointing. The new buttons take up a lot of screen real estate and are entirely worthless for people who don't use GNOME I understand that this is really an upstream issue, but perhaps Debian should make the file selector only show the buttons pointing to paths that actually exist. Or better yet (IMHO), only show the buttons in the first place if ~/.gnome or whatever other directory where these things are found exists. I've always believed that GTK should be independent from GNOME, though. I don't really see that it has much connection with `gnome users' -- if the buttons are just shortcuts to particular directories, you'd think they'd work fine in any GTK app as long as the directories exist. Morever, there are probably many `gnome users' -- people who use gnome apps (I'm one!) -- that do not want either the directories or the buttons. I think your first suggestion, to only show the buttons for which directories exist, is much better, and does directly address the problem. Ideally, you could simply make a list somewhere of your personal `useful directories' and have the file browser show buttons for them (if they exist :-); I see no reason to limit people to these especially horrible names. Should I file a bug about this? I think that would be a good idea. -Miles -- I distrust a research person who is always obviously busy on a task. --Robert Frosch, VP, GM Research
Re: New buttons in GTK filesel
Jean-Christophe Dubacq [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Did you have a look at the real new file selector? The one eg in http://primates.ximian.com/~federico/news-2004-03.html http://primates.ximian.com/~federico/news-2004-02.html This is the one in gtk2.4. Don't shoot at the wounded. Whoops. The real one does seem to have a `bookmark list' (as another poster called it); do entries there only show up if they exist? BTW, the new F.S. is missing the text box, and I've heard you can make it pop up by typing ^I -- is there way to make it appear by default? Thanks, -Miles -- Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. -- Jerry Garcia
Re: New buttons in GTK filesel
Ross Burton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: BTW, the new F.S. is missing the text box, and I've heard you can make it pop up by typing ^I -- is there way to make it appear by default? Read the release notes. It's control-l, and no. Hmmm, According to the release notes, ^L actually pops up a dialog, which is even more losing. I don't see any mention of it in the notes, but seem to recall that the new gtk somehow allows the save dialog to be overridden somehow, so a user could substitute their own dialog that fixes this problem, right? Thanks, -Miles -- ((lambda (x) (list x x)) (lambda (x) (list x x)))
Re: Debian-update Gnome applet
On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 08:00:14PM -0600, Jerry Haltom wrote: What's a `notification tray'? I don't seem to have anything like that. Add one to your panel. Add to Panel Utilities Notification Area I tried -- the menu entry is there -- but doing so has no obvious effect; is it a zero-width applet?!? -miles -- Yo mama's so fat when she gets on an elevator it HAS to go down.
Re: Debian-update Gnome applet
-- A zen-buddhist walked into a pizza shop and said, Make me one with everything.
Re: Debian-update Gnome applet
Jerry Haltom [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A per user daemon that simply checks weither or not there are pending upgrades, and displays an icon in the notification tray. What's a `notification tray'? I don't seem to have anything like that. -miles -- A zen-buddhist walked into a pizza shop and said, Make me one with everything.
Re: Debian-update Gnome applet
Jerry Haltom [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Anyway to make it SMALLER? It's a massive applet. I just want a single icon. Yeah, me too -- with the existing `nothing to upgrade' text it takes up about 1/4 of my panel! Ideally the general appearance should be small and almost unnoticeable when there's nothing to upgrade, and become more noticeable when there is something to upgrade... -Miles -- `Life is a boundless sea of bitterness'
Re: Font differences between GNOME in SID and GNOME default
On Fri, 2004-02-20 at 03:43, Josselin Mouette wrote: dpkg-reconfigure fontconfig enable the autohinter All I have to say is, Thank You, Thank You, Thank You. Yeah, thank you from me too, but in the opposite direction: I turned the auto-hinter _on_, and now suddenly my fonts look _much_ better now (all the lines in the font are suddenly actually aligned to pixel boundaries). This is especially noticeable with CJK fonts, which I guess are rather demanding to display well at small sizes. -Miles -- Occam's razor split hairs so well, I bought the whole argument!
Re: Font differences between GNOME in SID and GNOME default
Miles Bader [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I turned the auto-hinter _on_, and now suddenly my fonts look _much_ better now (all the lines in the font are suddenly actually aligned to pixel boundaries). This is especially noticeable with CJK fonts, which I guess are rather demanding to display well at small sizes. Hmmm, now that I think about it, perhaps the reason is that the japanese ttf fonts I use (ttf-kochi-*) basically have no built-in hinting -- they certainly look like it with the autohinter is turned off (completely wacky with respect to pixel boundaries), so turning it on really helps! Fonts that previously looked pretty good because they had good built-in hinting (e.g., MS Georgia, Bitstream Vera stuff) look different now, but not really better or worse. Depends on taste I suppose. -Miles -- Come now, if we were really planning to harm you, would we be waiting here, beside the path, in the very darkest part of the forest?
Re: metacity and #226961
Sebastien Bacher [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Apparently there is no way to fix the panel problem (bug #226961) without changing the sloppy behaviour. BTW the new behaviour seems good, is that a problem for somebody ? That bugzilla discussion is extraordinarily confusing; it seems to be about N vaguely related issues, whose connection isn't clear, half of which are bugs, and half of which is just random griping. I certainly don't like the new click-raises (but _also_ sends the click!) behavior, FWIW; it would be nice if they made it an option, but I suppose gnome religion sticks its dreadful nose in at this point... -Miles -- 80% of success is just showing up. --Woody Allen
Re: Debian splash screen (was: Re: Debianizing Debian's GNOME/KDE a bit more)
Xavier Bestel [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Speaking of Debian splashscreen, the currently provided one is awful. Why not shipping one of those present on http://art.gnome.org/themes/splash_screens/index.php ? I agree completely; the latter two you mention actually are installed (by desktop-base), but they're not the default. -Miles -- Whatever you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do it. Mahatma Gandhi
Re: Debianizing Debian's GNOME/KDE a bit more
Carlos Liu [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Why not use /usr/share/images/desktop-base/Splash-Debian_red.png as the default splash image? I think it's the best in those three pics. Hmmm, it's `professional' looking, but it's kind of boring too. I like Splash-EvolvingTux.png myself -- it's simple, clean, and smartly done, and unlike the others, is amusing as well (sure it's slightly geeky, but not painfully so). Surely that's got to count for something... The current default, Splash-Debian.png (the picture of a lake), is definitely the worst of the three in my opinion -- the slightly off-horizontal cast of the lake surface (which is very obvious with all the other horizontal edges nearby), the odd border, and the placement of the logo/text really make it look amateurish. It seems like someone was trying to copy the sort of photo splash image Gnome/TheGimp uses, but didn't do a very good job. -Miles -- The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources. --Albert Einstein
Re: shutdown from gnome logout dialog
Evan Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: (But really, as everyone says, it's ridiculous to have a Documents button in GTK when you don't have GNOME.) I think it's also ridiculous to have a Documents button even if you _do_ have Gnome, if you don't have a Documents directory (many programs seem to eagerly recreate this directory everytime I'm not looking, but I re-delete it just before I uninstall that program). -Miles -- `Suppose Korea goes to the World Cup final against Japan and wins,' Moon said. `All the past could be forgiven.' [NYT]
Re: Evolution, calendrier dates
Evan Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: That seems reasonable enough, but I'm not quite sure what aspect of this problem makes it more time-consuming to send a patch to the evolution devs than it would to send to the Debian BTS... FWIW I've generally found upstream developers are more ... prickly than the debian maintainers. Maybe it's just because the debian maintainers don't have so much invested in the existing code, and find it easier to view things from a user's perspective. Also debian has a very kewl bug-tracking system (no @#$%! web forms). -miles -- `...the Soviet Union was sliding in to an economic collapse so comprehensive that in the end its factories produced not goods but bads: finished products less valuable than the raw materials they were made from.' [The Economist]
Re: gnome-velocity packages now incoming
Carlos Perelló Marín [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The thing I remember in particular is the panel crashing... Could you send a bug report to bugzilla.gnoem.org with a backtrace ? It's a sufficient pain that I'm not going to try again until 2.4 hits unstable (which I guess should be soon); hopefully it's some problem that's already been fixed. -Miles -- I distrust a research person who is always obviously busy on a task. --Robert Frosch, VP, GM Research
Re: gnome-velocity packages now incoming
Carlos Perelló Marín [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The future is all UTF-8, it's the best way to work correctly across a multi-language world. Just look at MacOSX, RedHat and Windows (I think Windows is already with Unicode but I'm not sure). I think you should start using the .UTF-8 locales by default. I suppose maybe it works better if you don't breath on it too strongly, but gnome's support for utf8 seems ... fragile. I normally use LANG=ja_JP.eucJP, and everything (including gnome panel/apps) works fine; I tried using LANG=ja_JP.utf8 as my login locale (set by gdm) a while ago, and while emacs handled it correctly, gnome apps started flaking out and crashing left and right (this was gnome v.whatever was in unstable a few months ago). Maybe when 2.4 shows up I'll try again... -Miles -- [|nurgle|] ddt- demonic? so quake will have an evil kinda setting? one that will make every christian in the world foamm at the mouth? [iddt] nurg, that's the goal
Re: gnome-velocity packages now incoming
Carlos Perelló Marín [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I tried using LANG=ja_JP.utf8 as my login locale (set by gdm) a while ago, and while emacs handled it correctly, gnome apps started flaking out and crashing left and right Hmmm It works here without problems since long time ago (with GNOME 2.x), there are some nongtk applications that have some troubles with UTF-8 but all GNOME works without problems. I'm using es_ES.UTF-8 (ISO-8859-15) Perhaps it only works properly with european locales (I wouldn't be surprised). The thing I remember in particular is the panel crashing... -miles -- [|nurgle|] ddt- demonic? so quake will have an evil kinda setting? one that will make every christian in the world foamm at the mouth? [iddt] nurg, that's the goal
Re: shutdown from gnome logout dialog
Sebastian Kapfer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Because you can tell it to shutdown, and then forget about the box, instead of having to log out of gnome, wait a few minutes A few minutes?! I hope you're exaggerating here. It can take a long time, anyway, usually lots of stuff has to get paged in, etc. It's usually about 30-40 seconds on my machine, long enough that many times I _have_ gone away and done something else -- and even worse, I use the `autologin after 30s' function of gdm, so often I find it's logged me back in by the time I get back... :-) -Miles -- Most attacks seem to take place at night, during a rainstorm, uphill, where four map sheets join. -- Anon. British Officer in WW I
Re: Today's the day...
Portalier Julien [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dude... if X 4.3 is needed by Gnome 2.4 (or even only the control-center), we're far to see it in Debian... I'm not sure I really want to know, but why does 2.4 (or the control-center in 2.4) require X 4.3? Gnome 2.2 seems to run happily under X 3.6.x... -Miles -- Run away! Run away!
Re: Anti-aliased fonts issues
Matt Brubeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I find that the ttf-bitstream-vera fonts do a great job of reading well against all backgrounds (not surprising, since they were professionally designed and optimized for on-screen viewing with freetype/X11). Yeah, I second this -- I use light-on-black for most apps, and the bitstream vera fonts look great; the hinting apparently makes all the difference. The microsoft core fonts (msttcorefonts) are also well hinted, and look pretty good (not as good as vera). -Miles -- o The existentialist, not having a pillow, goes everywhere with the book by Sullivan, _I am going to spit on your graves_.
Re: ITP: dev-common -- cvs/svn snapshot package building aid
Mark Howard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: * Package name: dev-common An abstract build system based on Makefile inheritance, inspired by cdbs, with as much automation as possible. Note: This is not for inclusion in the main Debian repository, nor are any dev-gnome packages. This is not being sent to the bts. Good thing, because most generic package name ever... -Miles -- We have met the enemy, and he is us. -- Pogo
Re: new file open dialog
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eloy A. Paris) writes: Ahhh, the pleasure of having useful buttons in the file selector dialog... home, desktop, documents. What else one can ask for? :) Actually those giant buttons seem like a waste of space -- home is arguably useful, but `desktop' and `documents'? Who on earth puts anything there (I don't even _have_ a `documents' directory)?!? And do they _really_ need icons the size of an aircraft carrier? _Far_ more useful would be a pop-down list of the last N directories you used in the dialogue. -Miles -- .Numeric stability is probably not all that important when you're guessing.
Re: How do you stop Metacity raising the foused window?
Julien Portalier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But this feature will certainly never be implemented officially in Metacity (i think there could at least have a gconf key for something obvious like this...), if you want a real highly customisable WM you should remove metacity and use sawfish instead. I far prefer sawfish too (metacity just always seems to do things `wrong'), but I was under the impression that the gnome people were pushing metacity, if for no other reason than the maintainer is an active gnome participant -- so it'd be nice if metacity implemented at least the most common optional features (and I think this is one of them)! -Miles -- In New York, most people don't have cars, so if you want to kill a person, you have to take the subway to their house. And sometimes on the way, the train is delayed and you get impatient, so you have to kill someone on the subway. [George Carlin]
Re: GNOME 2.2 summary 22/06/2003
Marcelo E. Magallon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: That's offtopic for this list, but just as info, I stopped using testing about a year ago, give or take some months. Previously I *tried* using testing for about two years until the day when I became clear that even if it sounds great on paper, in reality it's utterly broken. ??? I don't think that's true, in general. testing's not perfect, but it's not anywhere near `utterly broken.' I use testing on my home machine and it seems to work quite well for just about everything _except_ gnome (I use whoever's gnome 2.x backport, so I don't have any probs with that). Perhaps KDE has similar problems but I don't use that, and really, there don't really seem to be all that many big hairy subsystems like Gnome or KDE which are composed of many package with hard to expression relationships. For the most part testing seems like what it was intended to be -- a slightly old verion of unstable without unstable's occasional nasty bugs. Because the problem cases (e.g. Gnome) seem to be the exception, presumably they could be handled with a few extra knobs somewhere. -Miles -- Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. -- Jerry Garcia
Re: gnome `recovery' after accidental shutdown
Michel Dänzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: After booting, when I logged in from gdm, I first got an error from `gconf' than it couldn't lock this file: ... Hitting `OK' just went back to gdm, and logging again yielded the same result. Judging from the name, I figured it was just a lock file, and could be removed, so I removed it and tried logging it again. Whoops. Any interesting gconf related messages in log files in /var/log/ ? (use something like zgrep -l gconf /var/log/*log* to check) There are tons of messages from gconf, but most are in an unknown coding system -- I normally log in using `EUC-JP' but these messages don't seem to be in EUC-JP, nor UTF-8, or at least emacs' decoder can't deal with them. Here's a pruned version of a grep through /var/log, though, with all duplicate lines removed (there were about 40,000 of them!); note that because of the duplicate removal, they all show up as being in `user.log', but in fact there were also identical messages in `/var/log/messages', etc: uo Description: Log messages from hosted gconf (2) Is Gnome's error recovery really this bad, or is something wrong with my setup? Even a journalling filesystem can't guarantee perfect recovery of accidents. Of course not, but ext3 (and ext2 for that matter) tries _very_ hard, and suceeds about 99% of the time. From my admittedly naive reading of what happened to me, gconf didn't seem to do even the most basic attempts at recovering from the situation, or even give any useful advice to allow the user to do so (it didn't even give _cryptic_ advice, which would have been better than nothing). Any time there's a lock file, there's going to be situations where it accidentally gets left around, so a system like Gnome, which is aimed at naive users, absolutely needs to do some sort of error recovery. -Miles -- Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. -- Jerry Garcia
Re: gnome `recovery' after accidental shutdown
BTW, I should note that Jens Madsen kindly provided me with a fix for my problem: cd $HOME; rm -rf .gconf*/*lock* Which worked like a charm. [I just noticed that he didn't CC: the list] -Miles -- I'd rather be consing.
gnome `recovery' after accidental shutdown
I accidentally turned off my machine (after it had been idle all night), but figured, no big deal, ext3 c can handle it. However the problem seems to be gnome. After booting, when I logged in from gdm, I first got an error from `gconf' than it couldn't lock this file: ~/.gconf/%gconf-xml-backend.lock/ior Hitting `OK' just went back to gdm, and logging again yielded the same result. Judging from the name, I figured it was just a lock file, and could be removed, so I removed it and tried logging it again. Whoops. Now it gives me a different error upon startup and displays a default configuration, none of my panels, background, anything. Here's the error dialog that pops up (it actually pops up a bunch of times, and I hit the `Details' button to get the cryptic sounding messages). An error occurred while loading or saving configuration information for gnome-panel. Some of your configuration settings may not work properly. Adding client to server's list failed, CORBA error: IDL:omg.org/CORBA/COMM_FAILURE:1.0 Adding client to server's list failed, CORBA error: IDL:omg.org/CORBA/COMM_FAILURE:1.0 Adding client to server's list failed, CORBA error: IDL:omg.org/CORBA/COMM_FAILURE:1.0 ... So: (1) Can anyone suggest a way for me to get back to normal? (2) Is Gnome's error recovery really this bad, or is something wrong with my setup? Thanks, -Miles -- `Cars give people wonderful freedom and increase their opportunities. But they also destroy the environment, to an extent so drastic that they kill all social life' (from _A Pattern Language_)
Re: annoying changes in gnome-terminal
Jeff Waugh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Um, OK, but that doesn't really tell me anything -- this release seems to have _broken_ font sizes, not fixed them. They've changed back, but they shouldn't be broken. You're now back to normal, basically. So, `normal' is (1) has oddly unintuitive font sizing (for vera sans mono, big jump between font sizes 8 and 9, font sizes 9 and 10 exactly the same width, but different heights), and (2) different than other gnome apps (in which font sizing seems to behave more intuitively)? Or is there likely to be something wrong with my particular setup? Thanks, -Miles -- `To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems' --Homer J. Simpson
Re: annoying changes in gnome-terminal
Christian Marillat [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I don't know why only gnome-terminal seems to be affected, but then fonts in debian are a big fragile glump to me; I guess I was lucky that things worked for even a short while...:-( User aren't supposed to use unstable like stable. Each time you do an apt-get bugs are fixed some others are introduced. Er, yeah, I understand that. So ... any ideas? Has anyone heard of similar problems, or have a clue where the trouble actually lies? If you want to use unstable you should install apt-listchanges then you can received what's changed in the latest upgrade like : I just look in /usr/share/doc for recent changes. In this case, I didn't see anything obvious, and wondered if a debian gnome guru had a better instinct for what might have changed. I think this is a particuarly odd problem because it only seems to affect gnome-terminal -- other gnome apps, using the same fonts and the same font dialog, etc., seem to do `the correct thing.' I notice that the ChangeLog for libvte4 has this entry, which may be pertinent: 2003-02-26 nalin * src/vte.c(vte_terminal_font_open_xft,vte_terminal_font_open_pango): tweak width calculations to handle incomplete font coverage. From HEAD. Thanks, -Miles -- Though they may have different meanings, the cries of 'Ye-haw!' and 'Allahu akbar!' are, in spirit, not actually all that different.
Re: annoying changes in gnome-terminal
Christian Marillat [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm talking about Debian changelog. In the latest I see : vte (1:0.10.27-1) unstable; urgency=low * New upstream release. * Fix fonts size (Closes: #186705) Um, OK, but that doesn't really tell me anything -- this release seems to have _broken_ font sizes, not fixed them. I guess I'll just wait until 0.11.x gets into unstable again, and see if things are still screwy (since other messages in this thread seem to be saying such problems are fixed there). -Miles -- Is it true that nothing can be known? If so how do we know this? -Woody Allen
annoying changes in gnome-terminal
1. In gnome terminal I've been using the font `Bitstream Vera Sans Mono 10', which was a good size for me. However after doing an apt-get upgrade from unstable yesterday (the actual change may have been earlier, as I just got back from a week-long holiday; my previous `working' apt-get upgrade was a little over a week ago), it now is _not_ a good size, it's suddenly much bigger. The next lower size of that font (9) is the _same_ width (only the _height_ of the character change!), and the next-next lower size (8) is much smaller (too small); I now can't seem to select a good size of this font in gnome terminal at all. Other than the apt-get upgrade, I didn't change any settings. The weird thing is that in other gnome apps, and in emacs, I can still select my `preferred size' just fine. E.g., in gedit, I can select `Bitstream Vera Sans Mono 9' and that's the same font that I used to get in gnome-terminal with size 10. In emacs, I use the following x font spec: -bitstream-bitstream vera sans mono-medium-r-normal-*-*-100-*-*-*-*-*-* which gets me the font I want: -bitstream-bitstream vera sans mono-medium-r-normal--10-86-83-84-m-60-iso8859-1 2. Another new problem with gnome-terminal is that it's no longer displaying Japanese characters correctly; it used to work with no special effort, but now japanese characters output from commands are displayed as little empty boxes. I use LANG set to `ja_JP.eucJP' (set from gdm), and again things seem to work properly in gedit and emacs (so at least I know it's probably not a installed-font problem or something). I don't know why only gnome-terminal seems to be affected, but then fonts in debian are a big fragile glump to me; I guess I was lucky that things worked for even a short while...:-( So ... any ideas? Has anyone heard of similar problems, or have a clue where the trouble actually lies? Thanks, -Miles -- `...the Soviet Union was sliding in to an economic collapse so comprehensive that in the end its factories produced not goods but bads: finished products less valuable than the raw materials they were made from.' [The Economist]
Re: non-western font support in, gnome/gtk
Colin Walters [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If I try to do something like: LANG=ja_JP.utf-8 gnome-terminal UTF-8 should be uppercase. That gets rid of the warnings, though it still doesn't work correctly... -Miles -- We live, as we dream -- alone
Re: non-western font support in gnome/gtk
Just a note -- today's upgrade to gtk 2.2 seems to have fixed all my problems problems, now at everything seems to display Japanese correctly (gnome-panel, menus, control-center, etc). I'm not sure where the problem was, but I'm happy it's gone... Thanks for your help, -Miles -- .Numeric stability is probably not all that important when you're guessing.
non-western font support in gnome/gtk
[please CC me on any replies, as I'm not subscribed to this mailing list.] I'm trying out using a different locale now, with LANG=ja_JP.eucJP (set from gdm). Emacs and mozilla deal fine with this, but all the gnome stuff (I'm using debian unstable, so it's basically gnome2) freaked out -- the text in menus, label, etc., now all appear as a series of little boxes with hex numbers inside. It seems that it found appropriate translated text to use, but is not displaying it correctly. I'm not sure whether I'm need to use an `all unicode' font for this stuff to work or not (i.e., as opposed to emacs, etc, which can use different fonts for different character sets), so I tried changing the standard font using the gnome menu's font preferences dialogue (I had to guess where it was though, since all the menu text is garbled now :-) I went through all the fonts it listed, and none seemed to work (I've got quite a few fonts installed -- including the `MS core fonts' -- although gnome2 apparently limits me to using truetype fonts). So I'm not sure what to try next, or even whether this is a bug or not (or what package to report it against). Any pointers? Thanks, -Miles -- I have seen the enemy, and he is us. -- Pogo
Re: non-western font support in gnome/gtk
Bastien Nocera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I used that config file for Xft: http://www.hadess.net/files/configs/hadess.XftConfig Can you tell what's special about that XftConfig? It looks more or less like what I've got; in particular, at least: dir /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Type1 dir /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/TrueType dir /var/lib/defoma/x-ttcidfont-conf.d/dirs/TrueType dir /var/lib/defoma/x-ttcidfont-conf.d/dirs/CID ... match any family == Sans edit family += Kochi Gothic; match any family == Serif edit family += Kochi Mincho; match any family == Monospace edit family += Kochi Gothic; Mozilla has no problems rendering japanese, so I'm not sure it's a problem with freetype (thought ft does a pretty bad job of the rendering!). installed all the font packages mentioned at the top, and used jp_JP.UTF-8 as the locale. How did you do that -- gdm only seems to offer two applicable choices in the `Language' menu: ja_JP.eucJP and ja_JP.shift_jis (not sure about the exact name of the latter, but it's in the menu). If I try to do something like: LANG=ja_JP.utf-8 gnome-terminal from an xterm, I get warning messages like: (gnome-terminal:12060): Gdk-WARNING **: locale not supported by Xlib (gnome-terminal:12060): Gdk-WARNING **: can not set locale modifiers and then everything is as broken as before. I made sure the `locales' package is installed, and ja_JP.eucJP and ja_JP.utf-8 locales enabled, is there something other place where I've got to make sure locale info is generated? Another, _very_ strange thing I noticed, which may provide a clue to the problem: during session startup, in the gdm startup messages, there are 1 or 2 message that _do_ display japanese correctly -- but after a point, the wierd `boxes' start showing up instead. The point at which it seems to break is where I have it run xrdb to setup my X resources, though I'm not sure what in there could affect anything; here's my .xrdb file, with obviously irrelevant lines removed: *Foreground: White *Background: Black *CursorColor: LightBlue #define FIXED -BH-LucidaTypewriter-Medium-R-Normal-Sans-*-100-* *inputMethod: kinput2 ! For kinput2: kinput2*Font: FIXED *kanjiFont: -Shinonome-Gothic-Medium-R-Normal--12-110-75-75-C-120-JISX0208.1990-0 Emacs*Font: FIXED *BeNiceToColormap: false XTerm*scrollBar: true XTerm*saveLines: 300 XTerm*utmpInhibit: true XTerm*termName: xterms XTerm*geometry: -0+0 Seems simple enough ... I guess I should try removing the invocation of xrdb and see if that fixes things... Thanks, -Miles -- [|nurgle|] ddt- demonic? so quake will have an evil kinda setting? one that will make every christian in the world foamm at the mouth? [iddt] nurg, that's the goal
Re: Gnome2 and Japanese AA fonts.
Akira TAGOH writes: you need to install ttf-kochi-gothic and ttf-kochi-mincho and append the following line to your .xftconfig or XftConfig: dir /usr/share/fonts/truetype/kochi Wow, thanks for that advice! After doing what you recommend (and a little more fiddling in Mozilla), suddenly Japanese web pages look about 1000 times better! I wish the font packages could do this kind of fiddling automatically. [In my experience, getting fonts to work well is one of most confusing and frustrating things about debian (I assume other dists like Redhat just have everything pre-configured to work well, since they normally distribute as a complete system image). There seem to be a thousand little places that you have to tweak (which depends on exactly which combination of packages you've got installed), none of which are obvious to someone that doesn't know the details of the implementation well, and the only real documentation I've seen is random messages on mailing lists.] Hmmm, sorry to end with a complaint... anyway, I'm grateful for the wonderful mailing lists! Thanks, -Miles -- `Life is a boundless sea of bitterness'
Re: gnome 2 settings
Graham Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Some `general' UI settings weren't preserved; the only one I remember right now is that before I had `icons only' for task-bars, and afterwards I had iconstext. task-bars? I'm not sure what you mean here. i think he meant toolbars. Yeah, that's what I meant. The default is for each button to be a little picture with some text below it, and I had it set to have only the little picture. -Miles -- A zen-buddhist walked into a pizza shop and said, Make me one with everything.
Re: `gnome-approved' dark-background theme for gnome 2?
Graham Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hmmm, maybe I can use one of those headers people are always using to avoid CCs to actually get them, when I send to debian lists. :-) But I can never remember which is which... Mail-Copies-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mail-followup-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gnus doesn't seem to grok `Mail-Followup-To:' (at least the version I'm using). -Miles -- I have seen the enemy, and he is us. -- Pogo
Re: gnome 2 settings
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 12:57:49PM -0500, Colin Walters wrote: Also, it would be nice if you could give us more information than my carefully crafted settings blew up. I know you are a technical person, and you should know that vague statements like that don't help in debugging. Yes, I know; me bad. Were panels in the wrong places? Did some applets not make the transition? Were your custom icons for Wanda the Fish not preserved? Etc. As far as I could tell, _none_ of my settings were preserved, and I got all the defaults (I suppose some were, but they weren't the visually obvious ones!). I think much of this might be due the conversion script not finishing, so I'm not sure whether it's worth going into tons of detail (but I'll try a bit anyway). Off the top of my head: * The panels I got bore no resemblance to what I had before; in particular, before I had 3 corner panels of various sizes, in the NW, SE, and SW corners, with launchers, applets, etc. Afterwards, I had just a top-edge `menu panel' (don't want that), and a bottom-edge panel with just a task-list and a `window nav' (don't know the name) applet. I think some of the applets I used to use weren't included with gnome2, so that might explain some things (and the gnome-applets [?] package didn't get upgraded until the _next_ time I ran aptitude, for some reason, though it didn't show up as broken or held the first time), though not the launchers. * My `gnome menu' customizations weren't preserved (before I had only debian menus enabled, and all others turned off, with the debian menus merged into the top-level). There doesn't seem to be a menu-editor anymore, so I'm not sure how to get this one back... * My background image wasn't preserved. * None of my gnome-terminal settings seem to have been preserved (roughly: colors, scroll-bar pos, menu-bar-hidden). * Some `general' UI settings weren't preserved; the only one I remember right now is that before I had `icons only' for task-bars, and afterwards I had iconstext. * At first it seemed to have tried to preserve my theme, but failed -- it was really wierd, widgets seem to be randomly using either my old dark theme or the default light-background theme. I tried to use the control-center to change it, but that didn't appear to work; later I realized this was because I had a `.gtkrc-2.0' file that pointed to my old gnome1 theme (I needed this before for gnome-terminal, which was updated to 2.0 before everything else), and that some things were using that, and some things were using the default theme. Deleting the file and using the control-center to change things properly fixed this. [BTW, the desktop icon that's supposed to invoke gnomecc didn't work, because there was no program called `gnomecc' -- only `gnome-control-center'] * My start-up settings weren't preserved: before I _didn't_ run the `desktop' program, but afterwards I got nautilus doing that; also before I had an entry that ran `xrdb', which wasn't preserved. Well, that's all that comes to mind right now; if I remember anything else that seems important I'll send a followup. BTW, the fonts look very nice in gnome2 (actually, that seems to be the main obvious improvement). Thanks, -Miles -- P.S. All information contained in the above letter is false, for reasons of military security.
Re: `gnome-approved' dark-background theme for gnome 2?
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 11:30:38AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote: [ Not sure if you're on -user or -gtk-gnome, so I'll CC you ] Indeed I'm not; thanks for CC'ing me (usually I _expect_ to get CCs, since most mail clients do that by default, but for some reason I never do when I post a query to debian lists...). Gnome 2.0 has hit unstable, and all my carefully crafted settings blew up (it mumbled something about converting them, but the conversion failed; it'd be nice if it told you why...). We need a tarball of your ~/.gnome directory. Note that once we find the bug in the conversion scripts, you can rm -rf ~/.gnome2 and try again. OK; I'll send when I get to work (where my unstable machine is). If it's very big, should I send it to you personally instead of this list? Thanks, -Miles -- We live, as we dream -- alone
Re: `gnome-approved' dark-background theme for gnome 2?
Colin Walters [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Debian Developer's reference says not to CC by default. But, we had this discussion over on emacs-devel already, so I'll just try to remember to CC you :) Hmmm, maybe I can use one of those headers people are always using to avoid CCs to actually get them, when I send to debian lists. :-) But I can never remember which is which... Mail-Copies-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ? -Miles -- `Life is a boundless sea of bitterness'
Re: gtk: is there a way of setting the `light/dark' style fields from a gtkrc file?
Jeff Waugh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[I.e., does the older release do a better job of rendering dark colors?]
Seems to, a friend used black and purple and it didn't look like arse.
Hmm, I grabbed your version of gtk-engines-icegradient (0.2-2) and made
my own `DeepIceGradient-dark' theme by copying your `DeepIceGradient'
theme and substituting my own colors. Unfortunately, it still looks
like arse. :-( I guess gtk's highlight-calculation code can cope with
the colors your friend uses, but not mine...
Here's my gtkrc file, for references:
# Edit these colors and fonts however you like.
style default
{
fg[NORMAL] = #E5E5E5
fg[ACTIVE] = #E5E5E5
fg[PRELIGHT] = #E5E5E5
fg[SELECTED] = #FF # #336699
fg[INSENSITIVE] = #545454 # #747474
# light[NORMAL] = #808080
# light[ACTIVE] = #808080
# light[PRELIGHT] = #808080
# light[SELECTED] = #808080
# light[INSENSITIVE] = #808080
bg[NORMAL] = #404040 # #D3D3DD
bg[ACTIVE] = #505050 # #C1C1CC
bg[PRELIGHT] = #484848 # #E5E5F7
bg[SELECTED] = #606060 # #D3D3FF
bg[INSENSITIVE] = #3C3C3C # #D3D3DD
base[NORMAL] = #484848 # #E5E5F7
base[ACTIVE] = #3C3C3C # #D3D3DD
base[PRELIGHT] = #3F # #FF
base[SELECTED] = #3F # #FF
base[INSENSITIVE]= #3C3C3C # #D3D3DD
text[INSENSITIVE]= #3C3C3C # #D3D3DD
# helvetica 120 is default, so it's not really needed here..
#font = -adobe-helvetica-medium-r-normal--*-120-*-*-*-*-*-*
engine icegradient
{
# You want the // on the handleboxes?
handlebox_marks = TRUE
# Do you want the // marks on the scrollbar handle?
scrollbar_marks = TRUE
# A single / on the scrollbar buttons, perhaps?
scroll_button_marks = TRUE
# Do you want the scrollbar handles rectangular or a bit shaped?
rect_scrollbar = TRUE
}
}
widget * style default
Thanks,
-Miles
--
Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra. Suddenly it flips over,
pinning you underneath. At night the ice weasels come. --Nietzsche
