Re: Backports of fixes from F32 -> F31?

Hey, On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 09:30, Alex Scheel wrote: And yeah, agreed. Backports are time consuming. But this is F31, not F30. There's at least another 6 months of support on this distro (technically...) and as referenced on that ticket, I'm not the only one that has hit it; there's

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

Hey, On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > List of packages and respective maintainers: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt Done: gnome-session gnome-shell-extensions(*) Cheers, Florian (*) accidentally, by

Re: Gnome-shell crash with Nvidia drivers (fix available but not in Fedora 24 it seems)

On Tue, 28 Jun 2016, 16:50 Michael Catanzaro, wrote: > > Hey Florian, it looks like a good time for another 3.20 release; > Yeah, I had planned another 3.20 release for a while. 3.20.3 is now pending for testing:

Re: [HEADS UP][RAWHIDE]: Gnome broken in Rawhide

Should be fixed by http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=701581 -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: does gnome have two sound volume settings?

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 12:52 PM, kendell clark wrote: > There seems to be two different sound volumes. I'll demonstrate. > First, go into the sound settings panel in the control center. [...] > I hear: output volume: slider 31454 31 percent. If I check the same > thing

Re: GNOME glitches in F21 - Should they be reported and against which components?

On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 1:51 PM, Alexander Ploumistos alex.ploumis...@gmail.com wrote: A few days ago I upgraded my main workstation to F21 and I've noticed a few annoying glitches, but I don't know if they are all worth reporting Yes. Glitches may be minor bugs, but bugs nonetheless. 1.

Re: GNOME glitches in F21 - Should they be reported and against which components?

On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Alexander Ploumistos alex.ploumis...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 5:29 PM, Florian Müllner fmuell...@gnome.org wrote: After a little bit of testing, I can confirm that it happens with every app. [...] Do I file this against mutter? Yes please

Re: F22 System Wide Change: GNOME 3.16

On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: Am 22.01.2015 um 17:59 schrieb drago01: This is just a game keep your insults for yourself maybe for you it is just a game That was not an insult, but was referring to the software in question, gnome-2048 -

Re: gnome-sudoku in F21

On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 3:40 PM, Joachim Backes joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de wrote: In gnome-sudoku (gnome-sudoku-3.13.90-3.fc21.x86_64) for F21 I'm missing the feature allowing to print multiple unsolved sudokus. You should use a user list/forum for these kinds of questions, as it is not

Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation

On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 4:58 PM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote: (My guess: Canonical will come up with their own Ubuntu App model requiring Ubuntu technologies If you had read Lennart's previous reply to this thread, you'd be aware that they already did. -- devel mailing list

Re: unaccessability

On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 6:36 PM, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote: Perhaps instead of ignoring them entirely, you can just sort the results or having a secondary view Click here for command line applications that match your search results etc can be considered. I guess the main

Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation

On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 11:03 AM, drago01 drag...@gmail.com wrote: Firefox for instance could use that, or libreoffice, or eclipse. If a user needs a newer version (or nightly build) without having upstream worry about the specific distribution. ... or users having to update their *entire*

Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation

On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net wrote: GNOME decided to break it all the time (can't even get extensions work from one gnome-shell version to the next one and no gracefully disabling is still functional breakage). So what do you suggest? We can

Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation

On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 6:57 PM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote: Florian Müllner wrote: ... or users having to update their *entire* system to unstable/experimental versions if they want to try the lastest Firefox/Libreoffice/Eclipse Then either upstream or the Fedora packager

Re: OpenH264 in Fedora

On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote: The intention is that any parties capable of obtaining and running the provided binaries[...] can have a fully licensed implementation of H.264 at no cost. IANAL, but I am sure that this will not be included in any

Re: Proposal: AppData files in all application packages?

On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 5:36 PM, Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com wrote: Le 06/09/2013 11:33, Richard Hughes a écrit : [1] http://people.freedesktop.org/~hughsient/appdata/ I don't see any localization information in those specifications... From the above link: Questions: [...] How do I

Re: Fedora 19 Gnome Desktop Touchscreen Usability

On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Thomas Sailer sai...@sailer.dynip.lugs.ch wrote: What is happening here? How can I get the shell to accept finger input too? It is fallout from the port to XInput2, see https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=697192. -- devel mailing list

Re: Do you think this is a security risk and if not is it a bad UI decision?

On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Przemek Klosowski przemek.klosow...@nist.gov wrote: Another example of such important change that recently appeared without recourse and much discussion is the lock screen: previously, the password unlock widget had focus so one could start typing the password,

Re: clock-applet memory leak

On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Przemek Klosowski przemek.klosow...@nist.gov wrote: Since clock-applet is a default install on every Fedora, I thought this would be widely reported While it is installed on every (default desktop spin) Fedora system, it is only used by the (non-default) GNOME

Re: cogl soname bump

On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: I'll work to rebuild associated deps now I just saw mutter and gnome-shell going by, thanks for taking care of that! -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Why is not enabled TapButton of touchpad on Fedora by default?

On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Camilo Mesias cam...@mesias.co.uk wrote: I always enable the feature but it is an ongoing annoyance that it is disabled at GDM, is there any way to force it to default to on for the whole system? I have the following in /etc/dconf/db/gdm.d/10-local-settings:

Re: Why is not enabled TapButton of touchpad on Fedora by default?

On Sep 18, 2012 2:56 PM, john.flor...@dart.biz wrote: Any ideas on the equivalent for KDM? No, sorry. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Install Fedora Button for LiveCD

On Apr 27, 2012 11:34 PM, Jared K. Smith jsm...@fedoraproject.org wrote: Sorry Bill -- I'm confused here. Was a notification method actually implemented? Was it enabled in F17.TC1? If so, I didn't see it. Or was it implemented only for rawhide? It was implemented only in the sense that

Re: Install Fedora Button for LiveCD

Hey, On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Kamil Paral kpa...@redhat.com wrote: I tried that out. For some reason the notification doesn't pop up after I run the program, is that intended? No, it should be shown in banner mode like in http://imgur.com/Gk1Az(that's a screenshot of running the

Re: Install Fedora Button for LiveCD

On Apr 20, 2012 11:55 AM, Jiri Eischmann eischm...@redhat.com wrote: The notification is nice, but the only job it does is that it says the live system is installable. It really doesn't help the user find out how to install it. The notification contains a button which is labeled Install. I

Re: Install Fedora Button for LiveCD

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 12:00 AM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.comwrote: In effect it may necessitate a reboot to get that notification back, in order to know how to install? Not if the notification is resident, in which case it will remain in the message tray even after it has been

Re: Unity For Fedora (As in OpenSUSE or Arch)

On jue, 2012-02-02 at 05:26 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Matthew Garrett wrote: Because it is the job of people who are proposing a spec to answer the objections of the people who perform critical analysis of the spec They did answer. You just didn't like their answer. Their answer was

Re: Unity For Fedora (As in OpenSUSE or Arch)

On mié, 2012-02-01 at 17:00 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: Yay cross-desktop maybe, but still a freaking disaster from a UI point of view, and the only thing I really dislike about GNOME 3 I don't think it's that bad, but that might just be me having different use patterns (for instance a

Re: Unity For Fedora (As in OpenSUSE or Arch)

On jue, 2012-02-02 at 01:28 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Florian Müllner wrote: No, but it would require that circle is drawn as circle and not a square (or just discarded without notice). The NotifyIcon spec explicitly allows either absurdity. If your icon theme thinks a square is a good

Re: Unity For Fedora (As in OpenSUSE or Arch)

On jue, 2012-02-02 at 00:44 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: So the argument that you're refusing to implement a cross-desktop protocol in order to ban random applications from adding themselves to the panel is bogus. Nobody said that. Florian Müllner did: Not really. We didn't implement

Re: Unity For Fedora (As in OpenSUSE or Arch)

On jue, 2012-02-02 at 01:16 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Then your implementation in gnome-shell would just be half-assed and crappy, just like your implementation of the XEmbed-based spec is. Unlike the XEmbed-based spec, the status notifier spec actually allows apps to specify whether their

Re: Unity For Fedora (As in OpenSUSE or Arch)

On jue, 2012-02-02 at 20:11 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Florian Müllner wrote: I actually agree to that - if we used the notifier spec in the top bar, we would either compromise on the intended experience, or provide a crappy implementation. Or in other words: the spec is a poor fit

Re: Unity For Fedora (As in OpenSUSE or Arch)

On jue, 2012-02-02 at 20:17 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: And the thing is, renaming Tooltip to Description will break all the existing implementations and provide no benefit whatsoever to the end user. It's just an internal identifier the user will never see. For all I care it could be called

Re: Unity For Fedora (As in OpenSUSE or Arch)

On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 9:59 PM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote: Florian Müllner wrote: It is not implemented with XEmbed. If the user runs non-GNOME software which tries to bring up a system tray icon, it is. The discussion was about GNOME shell's top bar. No application (GNOME

Re: Unity For Fedora (As in OpenSUSE or Arch)

On mié, 2012-02-01 at 18:25 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: The objections weren't addressed because they objected to the very point of the spec, making it impossible to address them without defeating the purpose of the spec. One main design goal of the spec was that it should NOT be the app's

Re: Unity For Fedora (As in OpenSUSE or Arch)

On mié, 2012-02-01 at 22:18 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: So the argument that you're refusing to implement a cross-desktop protocol in order to ban random applications from adding themselves to the panel is bogus. No, the argument for refusing to implement the protocol is that the spec is bad.

Re: Rolling release Fedora - fantastic idea

On dom, 2012-01-29 at 22:57 +, Noah Hall wrote: I'd love for Fedora become rolling simply because messing around with preupgrade and reinstalling is oh so tedious and a waste of my time. Why do you think more people are using Ubuntu for development? Whatever their reasons might be, Ubuntu

Re: A software center for Fedora

While I agree that our app-install story sucks, I'm far less convinced that we need yet-another-downstream solution. Florian -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: F17 heads up: gnome-shell for everyone!

On dom, 2011-11-06 at 22:42 +, Bojan Smojver wrote: The existence of all those extensions that bring back sanity (apps menu in normal view, workspaces in normal view, persistent dash for switching tasks in normal view etc.) is the proof of the ultimate irony - the (supposedly) biggest

Re: systemd: Is it wrong? - wrong order

2011/7/11 Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net my main critic on systemd shipped als default with F15 is that widely used services like NFS are not converted to systemd BEFORE systemd replaced upstart Given that Fedora only used upstart with existing SysV scripts, upstart should not have

Re: systemd: Is it wrong?

2011/7/11 Steve Dickson ste...@redhat.com Hmm? Shell only understands strings, too. What precisely are you asking for? in /etc/sysconfig/nfsservices set LOCKD_TCPPORT=234 In nfsservice.service EnvironmentFile=-/etc/sysconfig/nfsservices ExecStartPre=/sbin/sysctl -w $LOCKD_TCPPORT to