Hi, after the last update in F26 my wallpaper disappeared. Indeed all of them, but the default one were gone from /usr/share/backgrounds/gnome. When I investigated why, I found out that the default set of wallpapers was plit into gnome-backgrounds and gnome-backgrounds-extras. gnome- backgrounds now only include the default wallpaper, everything else is in *-extras.
First I have no idea why this change was made. Can anyone explain it to me?
Second it brings two problems: 1. until gnome-backgrounds-extras is added to the list of pre-installed packages we will only have two wallpapers pre-installed (GNOME default, Fedora default), that's kinda too few. 2. the transition is not handled very well, wallpapers are removed from gnome-backgrounds, but gnome-backgrounds-extras don't get installed. So many users lose wallpapers they've set and end up with a blank desktop wondering what has happened.
Jiri
On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 02:46:01PM +0200, Jiří Eischmann wrote:
Hi, after the last update in F26 my wallpaper disappeared. Indeed all of them, but the default one were gone from /usr/share/backgrounds/gnome. When I investigated why, I found out that the default set of wallpapers was plit into gnome-backgrounds and gnome-backgrounds-extras. gnome- backgrounds now only include the default wallpaper, everything else is in *-extras.
First I have no idea why this change was made. Can anyone explain it to me?
Second it brings two problems:
- until gnome-backgrounds-extras is added to the list of pre-installed
packages we will only have two wallpapers pre-installed (GNOME default, Fedora default), that's kinda too few.
gnome-backgrounds and gnome-backgrounds-extra should have Obsoletes: gnome-backgrounds < 3.24.0-1
- the transition is not handled very well, wallpapers are removed from
gnome-backgrounds, but gnome-backgrounds-extras don't get installed. So many users lose wallpapers they've set and end up with a blank desktop wondering what has happened.
gnome-backgrounds should have Recommends: gnome-backgrounds-extra = %{version}-%{release}
Zbyszek
On Fri, 2017-06-23 at 17:22 +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 02:46:01PM +0200, Jiří Eischmann wrote:
Hi, after the last update in F26 my wallpaper disappeared. Indeed all of them, but the default one were gone from /usr/share/backgrounds/gnome. When I investigated why, I found out that the default set of wallpapers was plit into gnome-backgrounds and gnome-backgrounds-extras. gnome- backgrounds now only include the default wallpaper, everything else is in *-extras.
First I have no idea why this change was made. Can anyone explain it to me?
Second it brings two problems:
- until gnome-backgrounds-extras is added to the list of pre-installed
packages we will only have two wallpapers pre-installed (GNOME default, Fedora default), that's kinda too few.
gnome-backgrounds and gnome-backgrounds-extra should have Obsoletes: gnome-backgrounds < 3.24.0-1
- the transition is not handled very well, wallpapers are removed from
gnome-backgrounds, but gnome-backgrounds-extras don't get installed. So many users lose wallpapers they've set and end up with a blank desktop wondering what has happened.
gnome-backgrounds should have Recommends: gnome-backgrounds-extra = %{version}-%{release}
Um, those recommendations seem to be the wrong way around, if anything? Your *first* suggestion would fix problem #2: adding those obsoletes would cause both packages to be installed on update of an existing system with the old, 'combined' gnome-backgrounds. Your *second* suggestion is not also necessary to solve problem #2...
On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 12:42:15PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Fri, 2017-06-23 at 17:22 +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 02:46:01PM +0200, Jiří Eischmann wrote:
Hi, after the last update in F26 my wallpaper disappeared. Indeed all of them, but the default one were gone from /usr/share/backgrounds/gnome. When I investigated why, I found out that the default set of wallpapers was plit into gnome-backgrounds and gnome-backgrounds-extras. gnome- backgrounds now only include the default wallpaper, everything else is in *-extras.
First I have no idea why this change was made. Can anyone explain it to me?
Second it brings two problems:
- until gnome-backgrounds-extras is added to the list of pre-installed
packages we will only have two wallpapers pre-installed (GNOME default, Fedora default), that's kinda too few.
gnome-backgrounds and gnome-backgrounds-extra should have Obsoletes: gnome-backgrounds < 3.24.0-1
- the transition is not handled very well, wallpapers are removed from
gnome-backgrounds, but gnome-backgrounds-extras don't get installed. So many users lose wallpapers they've set and end up with a blank desktop wondering what has happened.
gnome-backgrounds should have Recommends: gnome-backgrounds-extra = %{version}-%{release}
Um, those recommendations seem to be the wrong way around, if anything? Your *first* suggestion would fix problem #2: adding those obsoletes would cause both packages to be installed on update of an existing system with the old, 'combined' gnome-backgrounds. Your *second* suggestion is not also necessary to solve problem #2...
Yeah, sorry, I switched them.
But I think both make sense: we generally *do* want the -extra backgrounds to be installed, they add value to the default installation.
Zbyszek
On Fri, 2017-06-23 at 22:58 +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
But I think both make sense: we generally *do* want the -extra backgrounds to be installed, they add value to the default installation.
No. The whole point of creating the subpackage was to not have them installed by default.
On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 7:11 AM, Matthias Clasen mclasen@redhat.com wrote:
No. The whole point of creating the subpackage was to not have them installed by default.
I guess we need them installed by default for upgrades, but not for new installs.
Michael
On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 08:11:47AM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Fri, 2017-06-23 at 22:58 +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
But I think both make sense: we generally *do* want the -extra backgrounds to be installed, they add value to the default installation.
No. The whole point of creating the subpackage was to not have them installed by default.
I get why you might want to *allow* to not have them installed at all, but why not *recommend* that they are installed? On a desktop, the space savings are insignificant, the wallpapers are pretty, and if somebody doesn't like or gets tired of the default wallpaper, it's much easier to click-and-select rather then having to know about the -extras package and installing it and waiting and *then* click-and-select'ing. And unless you open the background-change dialogue, a few extra .png files are even hard to notice.
Zbyszek
El 24/6/2017 1:05 p. m., "Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek" zbyszek@in.waw.pl escribió:
On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 08:11:47AM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Fri, 2017-06-23 at 22:58 +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
But I think both make sense: we generally *do* want the -extra backgrounds to be installed, they add value to the default installation.
No. The whole point of creating the subpackage was to not have them installed by default.
I get why you might want to *allow* to not have them installed at all, but why not *recommend* that they are installed? On a desktop, the space savings are insignificant, the wallpapers are pretty, and if somebody doesn't like or gets tired of the default wallpaper, it's much easier to click-and-select rather then having to know about the -extras package and installing it and waiting and *then* click-and-select'ing. And unless you open the background-change dialogue, a few extra .png files are even hard to notice.
+1 as user I do not want that after a update this wallpapers are not going to be available, even more if I am using some of then
Matthias Clasen píše v So 24. 06. 2017 v 08:11 -0400:
On Fri, 2017-06-23 at 22:58 +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
But I think both make sense: we generally *do* want the -extra backgrounds to be installed, they add value to the default installation.
No. The whole point of creating the subpackage was to not have them installed by default.
I think this is a wrong decision unless we have an intuitive way to easily install additional wallpapers which we don't have.
Having TWO wallpapers pre-installed is really too few (I think all competition has a much wider choice). To install wallpapers now you have to open a terminal and dnf search for "wallpaper" or "background" and you'll get a flood of results with sets for different releases, different DEs, without any previews. I can't imagine my mum or dad doing this and they both change their wallpapers and they both have relied on the pre-installed set because they don't even know how to install RPM packages.
Jiri
On Mon, 2017-06-26 at 12:25 +0200, Jiří Eischmann wrote:
Matthias Clasen píše v So 24. 06. 2017 v 08:11 -0400:
On Fri, 2017-06-23 at 22:58 +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
But I think both make sense: we generally *do* want the -extra backgrounds to be installed, they add value to the default installation.
No. The whole point of creating the subpackage was to not have them installed by default.
I think this is a wrong decision unless we have an intuitive way to easily install additional wallpapers which we don't have.
This was a proposal by Ryan Lerch:
https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/12
Ryan, maybe you want to chime in here ?
On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 12:00:34PM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Mon, 2017-06-26 at 12:25 +0200, Jiří Eischmann wrote:
Matthias Clasen píše v So 24. 06. 2017 v 08:11 -0400:
On Fri, 2017-06-23 at 22:58 +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
But I think both make sense: we generally *do* want the -extra backgrounds to be installed, they add value to the default installation.
No. The whole point of creating the subpackage was to not have them installed by default.
I think this is a wrong decision unless we have an intuitive way to easily install additional wallpapers which we don't have.
This was a proposal by Ryan Lerch:
https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/12
Ryan, maybe you want to chime in here ?
Just to be clear, Kalev helped us make a package fix over the weekend to ensure that upgrading folks get both packages as they move to F26.
A set of the winning backgrounds from previous Fedora supplemental background submissions currently appear in the chooser starting in F26. So there are 15 total from which to choose. Additional backgrounds are still discoverable in the same way that those background submissions were previously. So all that is happening is swapping some content. This was discussed with the Workstation WG previously and approved as I recall.
On Mon., 26 Jun. 2017 at 8:26 pm, Jiří Eischmann eischmann@redhat.com wrote:
Matthias Clasen píše v So 24. 06. 2017 v 08:11 -0400:
On Fri, 2017-06-23 at 22:58 +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
But I think both make sense: we generally *do* want the -extra backgrounds to be installed, they add value to the default installation.
No. The whole point of creating the subpackage was to not have them installed by default.
I think this is a wrong decision unless we have an intuitive way to easily install additional wallpapers which we don't have.
Having TWO wallpapers pre-installed is really too few (I think all competition has a much wider choice).
I agree here, two is too few, however this was not the intention. The new Fedora-workstation-backgrounds will now be installed by default, which is the intention here.
--ryanlerch
To install wallpapers now you
have to open a terminal and dnf search for "wallpaper" or "background" and you'll get a flood of results with sets for different releases, different DEs, without any previews. I can't imagine my mum or dad doing this and they both change their wallpapers and they both have relied on the pre-installed set because they don't even know how to install RPM packages.
Jiri_______________________________________________ desktop mailing list -- desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to desktop-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Fri, 2017-06-23 at 14:46 +0200, Jiří Eischmann wrote:
First I have no idea why this change was made. Can anyone explain it to me?
Hi, just to add my two cents to this:
I've a rawhide virtual machine which I update from time to time and since some semi-recent update the background of the GNOME Shell turned to be white. My impression: hey, something broke in GNOME Shell, again. This is rawhide, breakage is expected, thus let's wait until it's fixed. (Let alone that I'm supposed to file a bug report, I do not want to turn this (sub)thread into any such discussion/flame war.)
I see that my impression was wrong.
I second Jiri's opinion, whatever the reason to split it was, and the answer wasn't given yet, then it was not the best decision from the user point of view at all. Bye, Milan
On Mon, Jun 26, 2017, 5:32 AM Milan Crha mcrha@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, 2017-06-23 at 14:46 +0200, Jiří Eischmann wrote:
First I have no idea why this change was made. Can anyone explain it to me?
Hi,
just to add my two cents to this:
I've a rawhide virtual machine which I update from time to time and since some semi-recent update the background of the GNOME Shell turned to be white.
This happens on Fedora 26 also, it happened to me over the weekend. The background images were deleted during updating, and restored only by manually installing -extras.
Beta testers will likely be experiencing this.
Chris Murphy
On Fri., 23 Jun. 2017 at 10:46 pm, Jiří Eischmann eischmann@redhat.com wrote:
Hi, after the last update in F26 my wallpaper disappeared. Indeed all of them, but the default one were gone from /usr/share/backgrounds/gnome. When I investigated why, I found out that the default set of wallpapers was plit into gnome-backgrounds and gnome-backgrounds-extras. gnome- backgrounds now only include the default wallpaper, everything else is in *-extras.
First I have no idea why this change was made. Can anyone explain it to me?
Thanks for reporting this! Just to clarify and confirm what happened here:
Second it brings two problems:
- until gnome-backgrounds-extras is added to the list of pre-installed
packages we will only have two wallpapers pre-installed (GNOME default, Fedora default), that's kinda too few.
The plan here was to split the existing gnome-backgrounds package into two sub-packages. One containing the default GNOME adwaita background (that changes every release) and the other GNOME backgrounds. This split means we can install the default adwaita background by default in Fedora workstation, with the rest of the wallpapers that show in the finder coming from the f**-backgrounds package (the default Fedora wallpaper) and the new Fedora-workstation-backgrounds package, which contains a set of new wallpapers to show in the finder by default. Showing only two was never intended.
- the transition is not handled very well, wallpapers are removed from
gnome-backgrounds, but gnome-backgrounds-extras don't get installed. So many users lose wallpapers they've set and end up with a blank desktop wondering what has happened.
This was an oversight on my part. With the recent updates to the package by Kalev upgrading users will get all the new Fedora-workstation-backgrounds, all the GNOME backgrounds, and the default Fedora background.
Cheers, Ryanlerch
Jiri_______________________________________________ desktop mailing list -- desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to desktop-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org