desktop October 2004

desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org

39 participants
17 discussions

Re: FC3 background
by Nicu Buculei 12 Oct '04

12 Oct '04

Diana Fong wrote: > The current Fedora background includes the version number, which does > not match the upcoming release. If you have simple, yet attractive, > background(s) for Fedora Core now is the time to propose it. i have a page with some simple visual elements related to Fedora Core in SVG format (and plan to add more), maybe someone will find something useful for creating backgrounds (for example a SVG version of the logo, which originally is in Illustrator format): http://www.nicubunu.ro/fedora/artwork/ > Backgrounds should be 1600*1200 and not include the version number i have on that page a couple of (pretty lame) backgrounds, in a smaller resolution but in scalable format (SVG) -- nicu my Fedora artwork: http://www.nicubunu.ro/fedora/artwork Open Clip Art Library: http://www.openclipart.org

2 3

Re: FC3 background
by Nicu Buculei 11 Oct '04

11 Oct '04

Diana Fong wrote: > The current Fedora background includes the version number, which does > not match the upcoming release. If you have simple, yet attractive, > background(s) for Fedora Core now is the time to propose it. what kind of backgrounds are desired? - something with Fedora theme - abstract images - illustrative (for example: natural images) how can some external contributor should propose a background? -- nicu my Fedora artwork: http://www.nicubunu.ro/fedora/artwork Open Clip Art Library: http://www.openclipart.org

4 4

What's wrong with backing store?
by Steffen Kluge 10 Oct '04

10 Oct '04

Hi, I've just got to ask this, please forgive me if it is only marginally on-topic for this list. Back when I started using X11 (late 80's, Ultrix, X11R3), turning on save-unders and backing store was an essential performance tuning step, that drastically improved the perceived "speed" of the desktop (e.g. disappearing menus exposed the underlying window instantly, without it having to be re-drawn). I've used save-unders and backing store ever since. Which also means that ever since starting to use RH desktops I had to turn it on manually, by editing the X command line in [gx]dm.conf. All RH and FC desktops I've used so far disable backing store (and at the same time save-unders - the two seem to be inextricably linked) by default. Why is that so? I have to admit that with modern hardware the perceived speed-up is small and may even be entirely based on self-suggestion. However, I'd like to understand the pros and cons of turning on backing store with modern X servers and on modern hardware. Cheers Steffen.

6 12

Why gpdf default again?
by Warren Togami 07 Oct '04

07 Oct '04

Before FC2's release, we purposefully changed the default pdf viewer from gpdf to ggv because gpdf was horribly unstable. That is still the case today, with it failing to open many PDF documents, or opening it and soon later locking up completely. Why did the default change back to gpdf? Can we switch back to ggv? Warren Togami wtogami(a)redhat.com

5 7

Bluecurve Theme Modification Experiments
by Steven Garrity 05 Oct '04

05 Oct '04

I've been thinking about ways to modernize the RedHat/Fedora Bluecurve theme lately and have started trying my ideas out in practice. My first goal is to improve on the Windows95-esque battleship-grey that colors all of the UI chrome. See this screenshot of Windows 98/2000/XP evolved: http://actsofvolition.com/images/screenshots/Display-95-through-XP.png Note the subtle color difference between 98 and 2000 - but it makes a huge improvement. I was looking at this screenshot of an XFCE beta (http://xfce.org/images/screenshots/xfce42.png) and was wondering why that main start menu looked so good (even though it was just using the bluecurve icons). It turns out it's a soft-beige rather than the battleship grey. So, I've tried this out with Bluecurve. The only change so far is that th primary chrome is now slightly softer and more beige than grey. Some elements that are still pure-grey (alternative list backgrounds, depressed buttons, etc) will look a bit odd next to the new beige, but I'd do them to. Here are before and after screenshots - open them in tabs and switch back and forth to compare: http://actsofvolition.com/images/screenshots/bluecurve-before.png http://actsofvolition.com/images/screenshots/bluecurve-after.png The updated theme is here: http://actsofvolition.com/images/screenshots/Bluecurve-2.tar.gz (once installed, you have to have to go to "Theme Details" and choose Bluecurve-2 in the "Controls" tab). Thoughts and feedback are welcome - particularly from those who maintain the current Bluecurve theme in Fedora. I'm much more interested in trying to help improve the defaults than I am in maintaining an optional theme. Thanks, Steven Garrity

2 1

Re: gnome now has two panels
by Mark McLoughlin 05 Oct '04

05 Oct '04

Hi Owen, On Mon, 2004-10-04 at 19:45, Owen Taylor wrote: > On Mon, 2004-10-04 at 18:55 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote: > > > > I was an existing user. I don't mind the change, and I like the > > > canned packages direction, but don't know if the change to my existing > > > panel layout was supposed to happen. > > > > You're right - if it screwed up your existing configuration, then > > that's a bug: > > > > http://bugzilla.gnome.org/attachment.cgi?id=31984&action=view > > Doesn't look like the right link... Yeah, sorry. Its: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=134537 > > But I don't mind telling you that scratching my head hasn't yet > > produced any viable ideas for fixing said bug :/ > > Could it simply be users that haven't changed their configuration at > all? Seems unlikely, but I suppose possible. No, the problem is that they've only changed *some* of their panel configuration. I've updated the bug report with an explanation: What's going on here is the panel configuration consists of a large set of inter-related GConf keys. Lets think about just two of them for a minute - toplevel_id_list and object_id_list. The former contains the list of panels in the configuration and the latter contains the list of launchers, menu buttons, menu bars etc. (everything but bonobo applets). These GConf keys individually inherit their default values from defaults database. If you set one of the keys, it no longer matters what the default is, but the other one still inherits the default. So, looking at Stephen's screenshot, its obvious what happened. He added a new launcher to his panel at some point, setting object_id_list to contain all the default launchers and his new one. toplevel_id_list remained unset, inheriting the default. Now, when the panel package was updated the defaults changed, adding an extra panel to toplevel_id_list, removing the menu button from object_id_list and adding the menu bar to object_id_list. End result is that Stephen sees the new panel, but still sees the menu button when he should be seeing the menu bar. Cheers, Mark.

1 0

background colour
by Féliciano Matias 05 Oct '04

05 Oct '04

I am using FC3T2 (rawhide) and I think : "good job guys" :-) In the desktop front, I find one very annoying thing : - The default background colour It is set to #FFFFFF. It's the brighter colour. In the "real" world, #FFFFFF mean the sun, a spot light, ... Generally, I adapt the setting of the monitor to not face to a wall of suns. But if I want to watch a movie, I need to adjust again the monitor setting. So, I use the theme ThinIce which does not have the background colour set to #FFFFFF. Example : Bluecurve (hot as the fire) : http://feliciano.matias.free.fr/background_colour/Capture-Bluecurve.png ThinIce : http://feliciano.matias.free.fr/background_colour/Capture-ThinIce.png My 2 cents feedback.

2 2

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

desktop October 2004