xfce March 2019

xfce@lists.fedoraproject.org

5 participants
5 discussions

Removal of Python 2 from the Xfce spin
by Miro Hrončok 11 Aug '19

11 Aug '19

Hi, we've successfully removed Python 2 from default Workstation installation years ago, today I'd like to see if we could do it in Xfce Spin as well. For those not in the picture: Python 2 ill EOL in 11 months, 22 days [0]. We are trying to get rid of it as much as possible in Fedora [1][2]. Eliminating Python 2 from our defualt installations is an important step here. Today, if I try to uninstall python2 from Xfce spin (rawhide), this is what gets removed as dependent: NetworkManager-openconnect-gnome blueberry gnumeric python2-catfish system-config-keyboard system-config-users Several others go as no longer needed, mostly python2 libs, but also: NetworkManager-openconnect bluez-obex bluez-tools openconnect wmctrl While I doubt the actual usefulness of gnumeric, what bothers me is: 1. It seems that the Bluetooth stack is entirely gone. Do we have an viable alternative? 2. If openconnect is not needed on Workstation, why is it needed in Xfce? 3. Can we set keyboards/users with some alternatives? system-config-* still link to fedorahosted as upstream and haven't received an update in years. They seem pretty upstream dead to me. 4. Catfish is Python 3 compatible, but the Fedora maintainer is not [4]. Thanks for tips. [0] https://pythonclock.org/ [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FinalizingFedoraSwitchtoPython3 [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Mass_Python_2_Package_Removal [3] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/catfish/pull-request/1# -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok

6 15

any sign of 4.14 in our future?
by ToddAndMargo 01 Apr '19

01 Apr '19

Hi All, Fedora 29 Xfce 4.13 I have a customer interested in me putting Fedora 29 on a laptop. Problem: Xfce 4.13 is too buggy to release on the general public. Me, I am loyal and know how to cope with the bugs, but a typicall usedr, I would not swiosh that on th em. Is 4.14 anywhere near? If not, is there a way to lock Fedora 29 into 4.12? If not, I guess Mate would be the closest alternative. I could always go with gnome, but it has a bad cas of the weirds. Many thanks, -T

2 4

Re: "Basic graphics mode" feature and criterion discussion
by Adam Williamson 26 Mar '19

26 Mar '19

On Tue, 2019-03-26 at 16:02 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote: > So with the above caveat understood that "work correctly" has a bunch > of asterisks next to it and you will probably be able to tell that > you're using a fallback path, I don't think it's intrinsically less > likely that graphics fallback would work. Well, practically speaking it is: right now we know of two bugs that affect this exact mechanism :) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1683197 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1691909 -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net

1 0

"Basic graphics mode" feature and criterion discussion
by Adam Williamson 26 Mar '19

26 Mar '19

Hi folks! So at last week's Fedora 30 Beta Go/No-Go meeting, it was decided that the Basic release criterion: "Boot menu contents The boot menu for all supported installer and live images should include an entry which causes both installation and the installed system to use a generic, highly compatible video driver (such as 'vesa'). This mechanism should work correctly, launching the installer or desktop and attempting to use the generic driver." should no longer apply to Beta - i.e. that it should no longer be a Basic or Beta criterion. The justification for this is, I hope I am correctly representing all views here (please say so if not), that this mechanism is both less necessary (due to a general reduction in the amount of 'weird' graphics hardware out there, and general improvement in the reliability and coverage of the major drivers for the major graphics hardware manufacturers) and inherently less likely to work (due to the general trend of work on kernel modesetting and Wayland) than it used to be. For context, it is worth noting that the *feature* predates the introduction of both kernel modesetting *and* Wayland to Fedora. What the feature initially did was tell anaconda to write an X config file specifying the 'vesa' driver (instead of working out the correct 'native' driver for the adapter and writing a config file specifying that). After KMS was introduced in Fedora 10, the mechanism was tweaked to also pass the 'nomodeset' kernel parameter to disable KMS. Around 2012 (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858270) we noticed that the X config file mechanism was a bit superfluous as 'nomodeset' alone could basically be relied on to force some sort of 'fallback mechanism', and so the feature was simplified to *only* specify the 'nomodeset' kernel parameter (this is all it does now). The *criterion* dates to 2010, in the Fedora 15 release cycle: it appears in the Fedora 15 Alpha criteria but not the Fedora 14 Alpha criteria. It was added on 2010-08-16: https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Fedora_15_Alpha_Release_Criteri… The group at the meeting did not, however, make any further decisions, so this leaves us with some open questions: 0) Do we generally agree with the decision made at the meeting? If anyone (especially a subject matter expert) strongly believes the decision was wrong and this should still be a Basic/Beta requirement, please say so. 1) Should the criterion be modified somehow, but some requirement in relation to some kind of fallback graphical mode be kept at Basic or Beta? 2) Should the criterion be moved to Final, unchanged or changed somehow? 3) Should the requirement just basically be dropped entirely as no longer useful? 4) (This one mainly for ajax and airlied) to what extent does the concept of a 'fallback option' for our supported desktop environments and graphical servers still actually make sense? Could a different implementation of the same basic idea be envisaged, and would it be useful? If so, should we do that, and what would be the consequences for the criteria? I realize this is quite a big and fuzzy topic, but I'm hoping the responses to this mail will clarify our path :) So if you have any kind of useful information or strong opinions on the general area here, please do contribute them, and hopefully a clearer way forward will emerge. Thanks everyone! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net

1 1

undistract-me packaging requested
by Kevin Fenzi 17 Mar '19

17 Mar '19

Hey everyone. I've seen a request ( https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687296 ) to package up 'undistract-me' ( https://github.com/jml/undistract-me ) I don't have the time right now, but if someone else could package it up that would be great! Thanks. kevin

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

xfce March 2019