KDE 3.0 Beta 2 is out

KDE - Beta is stable by lemonhed · 2002-02-13 07:47 · Score: 5, Interesting

Ive tried the KDE Beta 2. And I must say... Its a very very very stable pre-release. Hats off to the KDE developres.

The only problem is that some of the older KDE apps wont run correctly with the new KDE and they must be upgraded to work with the new QT packages.

Everyone should D/L it and check it out.

I demand to see the source! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-02-13 07:47 · Score: 5, Funny

I want proof that Konqueror cannot be removed from KDE without causing severe damage to the OS!

Re:I demand to see the source! by reflexreaction · 2002-02-13 08:00 · Score: 5, Funny

And I want to be charged $20 less for KDE when and if Konquerer can be removed.

--

We had to destroy the sig to save the sig.
Re:I demand to see the source! by IceFox · 2002-02-13 08:01 · Score: 5, Interesting

Actually what I would like is clear simply instructions on how to have the kde call openBrowser(url) open in something other then Konq. This is one of the major reasons why Kinkatta (kinkatta.sourceforge.net) isn't in KDE. Kinkatta gives the user the option to select what browser to use because I can't answer the e-mails on how to have openBrowser(url) use Galian or Mozzila, Opera, etc. I have many non-kde users that use Kinkatta, but giving users options is "not the kde way" acording to *someone* in kde.

--
Do you changes clothes while making the "chee-chee-cha-cha-choh" transformation sound?
Re:I demand to see the source! by Foresto · 2002-02-13 08:02 · Score: 1

Can't it?
http://www.konqueror.org/embedded.html
Re:I demand to see the source! by WetCat · 2002-02-13 08:03 · Score: 1

ln -sf /usr/bin/yourbrowser /usr/bin/konqueror
Re:I demand to see the source! by __past__ · 2002-02-13 08:16 · Score: 1

What's so hard about "Preferences -> File Browsing -> File Associations -> text/html"?

--
Programming can be fun again. Film at 11.
Re:I demand to see the source! by Vardamir · 2002-02-13 08:47 · Score: 1

That is re-damn-diculuos. I love KDE, and even konqueror - but sometimes I also like to use Mozilla. I also like Kinkatta, btw, when will it automatically receive your buddy list from OSCAR like GAIM and Everybuddy? This is fairly useful, but thanks for the great client - been using it since the 0.3x or 0.4x days.

I say we should start a petition demanding that Kinkatta be included in KDE and apps that don't use KDElibs or QT (though I love the library too - thinking about getting the boxed edition) be tollerated.
Re:I demand to see the source! by Jeffrey+Baker · 2002-02-13 08:51 · Score: 2

I'll tell you what's hard about it: it makes no sense. URLs must be handled by URL handlers, not by MIME type handlers. The content of the response to a URL is not known until the request is actually performed. The type might be text/html or it might be application/octet-stream or perhaps image/png or anything else. Similarly, a program that understands text/html might not know how to make HTTP requests, FTP requests, Gopher request, and so forth. Therefore the association of a URL handler by MIME type is nonsense. URL handlers should be speicified based on URL scheme.
Re:I demand to see the source! by 7-Vodka · 2002-02-13 08:53 · Score: 5, Informative
Actually what I would like is clear simply instructions on how to have the kde call openBrowser(url) open in something other then Konq.
Ok, your wish is granted.
1. Click on the kcontrol icon.
2. Click on file browsing tab.
3. Click on the file asociations tab.
4. Enter .html in the text box.
5. Change the order of the browsers.
Each user to his own browser. Just how I like it. Very easy to change.
Simple enough? I think so.
What peope don't seem to realize is that kde is more customizable than any other DE/WM. It's also scriptable. Type dcop in a term.
--
Liberty.
Re:I demand to see the source! by 7-Vodka · 2002-02-13 08:57 · Score: 1

WEll that is the _rare_ case. It's never bothered me before.
However, if it's bothered you, maybe you should submit a patch. Or even just use it yourself.

--
Liberty.
Re:I demand to see the source! by Sarcazmo · 2002-02-13 09:02 · Score: 1

You are missing the point, it's a major design flaw, and it's following a MS "standard" of trying to blur the web and the local file system, a standard based on fudging it, rather than making sense.
Re:I demand to see the source! by FooBarWidget · 2002-02-13 09:04 · Score: 1

Because lots of apps are hardcoded to use /usr/bin/konqueror
Re:I demand to see the source! by yesthatguy · 2002-02-13 09:12 · Score: 1

Well, you have access to the source, don't you? I can hardly form a useful regular expression, and I could probably fix this to use a different browser in about a minute.

--
Yes! That guy!
Re:I demand to see the source! by Enahs · 2002-02-13 09:19 · Score: 1

I bet you get really annoyed when you use GNOME, too.

--
Stating on Slashdot that I like cheese since 1997.
Re:I demand to see the source! by Arandir · 2002-02-13 09:22 · Score: 3, Insightful

You wanted "clear simply instructions on how to have the kde call openBrowser(url) open in something other then Konq". That's what you got. Clear simple instructions on how to have the browser of your choice called in place of konqueror. No, it's not a perfect scheme, but then again, nothing in life is perfect.

But I'll let you in on a little secret just so you can sleep better at night. The file associations are used by the file manager to associate file types with applications. Something else handles URLs. And you know what that is? The file manager itself. The name of that file manager is Konqueror. And that's the reason why the file manager doesn't need to be told which URL scheme goes with which URL handler. The file manager IS the URL handler.

--
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Re:I demand to see the source! by Arandir · 2002-02-13 09:26 · Score: 1

which ones?

--
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Re:I demand to see the source! by __past__ · 2002-02-13 09:46 · Score: 1

Would be tough - I never met a system where konqueror was in /usr/bin. I saw it in /usr/local/bin, /opt/kde/bin, /opt/kde2/bin, /usr/X11R6/bin and /usr/local/kde/bin, though. Care to tell which program does such bogus stuff?

--
Programming can be fun again. Film at 11.
Re:I demand to see the source! by richmaine · 2002-02-13 09:56 · Score: 1

Konqueror is in /usr/bin on redHat 7.2 anyway.
(I have no idea what, if any, programs depend on that).
Re:I demand to see the source! by Kopretinka · 2002-02-13 10:24 · Score: 1

(off topic, I know, I couldn't help it)
We demand to be heard!
We demand strictly set levels of uncertainty and doubt!
.
.
.
The answer . . . to the ultimate question . . . of life . . . the universe . . . and everything . . . is . . . 42. That's all, folks!

--
Yesterday was the time to do it right. Are we having a REVOLUTION yet?
Re:I demand to see the source! by JabberWokky · 2002-02-13 11:11 · Score: 2

This is one of the major reasons why Kinkatta (kinkatta.sourceforge.net) isn't in KDE. Kinkatta gives the user the option to select what browser to use because I can't answer the e-mails on how to have openBrowser(url) use Galian or Mozzila, Opera, etc.
No... or at least it hasn't come across the list. There *was* some talk about redesigning it to use the setting from the control center by default. What precisely are you talking about?
--
Evan

--
"$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
Re:I demand to see the source! by FooBarWidget · 2002-02-13 13:02 · Score: 1

Then go modify the source code. See you over a month when kdebase is finally compiled.
Re:I demand to see the source! by paulbeasd · 2002-02-13 13:06 · Score: 1

... Galian or Mozzila, Opera, ...

I think you must mean:
... Gallian, Mozzila, Oppirra ...
Re:I demand to see the source! by FooBarWidget · 2002-02-13 13:16 · Score: 1

OK, the variable BINDIR in the Makefile with "konqueror" appended.
Happy now? I thought it's obvious that I mean that.
Re:I demand to see the source! by Arandir · 2002-02-13 14:10 · Score: 1

Too heavyweight!?! It's a standard file association using MIME types!

Here's how the scheme works as near as I can tell: somewhere on the other side of the Sacred URL is a file. Using MIME, this file is associated with an application. It's pretty simple. You can't get much simpler without dumbing it down to the Windows level of file extensions.

What about using the URL? Well, an URL still has to be resolved to something, and that something is still going to be a file. Who knows what lies at the other end of the URL? What kind of file is "ftp://ftp.fu.bar/file"?

--
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Re:I demand to see the source! by colmore · 2002-02-13 14:43 · Score: 2

i think that's a problem with the aps and not KDE or Konqueror.

--
In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
Re:I demand to see the source! by uchian · 2002-02-13 14:44 · Score: 2

Your either compiling it on a spectrum or your doing something wrong. For a _FULL_ compile of kdelibs, kdebase, koffice and kdenetwork, it only takes about 8 hourse on my pathetic 350 MHz pc.

Which, let's be honest, is just a case of leaving it running and going to bed.
Re:I demand to see the source! by damiam · 2002-02-13 15:24 · Score: 1

On Debian sid:
$ file /usr/bin/konqueror /usr/bin/konqueror: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), stripped

--
It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
Re:I demand to see the source! by phutureboy · 2002-02-13 15:29 · Score: 1

I think you must mean:
... Gallian, Mozzila, Oppirra ...

Hrmph. There ought to be a "+ 0.3, Mildly Amusing" moderation option.
Re:I demand to see the source! by in_the_krug · 2002-02-13 17:04 · Score: 1

I couldn't figure that one out, either. Then, finally, solved the problem by going to correct ftp site: ftp.foo.bar

--
:wq
Re:I demand to see the source! by Rob+Kaper · 2002-02-13 18:27 · Score: 2

Noone said that you shouldn't give users a choice. It was argued that the KDE-way to open an browser is openBrowser() and that applications shipped as part of KDE should use the KDE API.

If you feel that functionality is missing from openBrowser(), you should still use it and fix openBrowser(). By not using it you give out a sign of unwillingness to adopt to KDE standards. You'd rather ignore the standards than fix them.

If you want your application to ship as part of KDE you're no longer a third party developer, you'd be a KDE developer and you'll have to think of a picture bigger than just your application.

Even more important however: I do not think KDE should replace shipped applications (there is a functional AIM client already) every time an alternative comes along, even if the alternative is better. That'd be inconsistent.
Re:I demand to see the source! by Rob+Kaper · 2002-02-13 19:11 · Score: 2

Similarly, a program that understands text/html might not know how to make HTTP requests, FTP requests, Gopher request, and so forth.

Actually, for KDE applications that is not a problem because they (should) all use the KIO technology which makes network file access completely transparent, whether it is http, imap, sftp, smb, whatever. As long as there is a KIO slave, any KDE application should be able to perform any request transparently.

But I still agree that openBrowser() should be configurable in KControl, just like the preferred mail and console applications are.
Re:I demand to see the source! by FooBarWidget · 2002-02-13 23:03 · Score: 1

I have a Pentium 166...

what about FreeBSD binaries? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-02-13 07:50 · Score: 5, Insightful

It turns out that a large silent number of
people are running KDE (and GNOME) desktops
under not *linux, but under FreeBSD. It would
be nice if more FreeBSD binary packages were
built.

Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-02-13 07:54 · Score: 1, Informative

You, the users, are responsible for building our binaries (or, erhm, someone that works on FreeBSD). KDE only releases source code.
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by InfinityEdge · 2002-02-13 08:09 · Score: 2, Insightful

Screw the binaries. All I want is a /usr/ports entry.

I get a nice, warm, fuzzy feeling knowing that everything on my computer was built from source by my computer.

You have to do something with all those spare cycles and I could really care less about finding alien signals from noise, cracking the latest DES, or factoring the largest mersine (sic) primes.

Viva la source!!!!

--InfinityEdge
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by Henry+V+.009 · 2002-02-13 08:13 · Score: 3, Funny

I get a nice, warm, fuzzy feeling knowing that everything on my computer was built from source by my computer.
Where did you get your compiler? It could be putting in a trojan every time you compile. Have you checked your binaries?
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by __past__ · 2002-02-13 08:22 · Score: 1

Yeah, trusting trust etc... Bla bla
There are more reasons to compile yourself. Think of speed. What binary packager will compile with any optimization flag other than -O2 (say, -march)? Not to mention that I can change the configure options in the ports Makefile.

--
Programming can be fun again. Film at 11.
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by Satai · 2002-02-13 08:25 · Score: 2

The KDE FreeBSD project is a fairly small, but interesting, site. I still build from ports, though.
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by Graspee_Leemoor · 2002-02-13 08:48 · Score: 1, Offtopic

"You have to do something with all those spare cycles and I could really care less about finding alien signals from noise, cracking the latest DES, or factoring the largest mersine (sic) primes."

Well how about finding a cure for cancer? It used to be Windows only, but I think there is a linux console version now, or if not, there at least is for some of the other worthy causes to crunch numbers for.

I run the cancer one on 3 of my boxes at home; I guarantee you will get more of a genuine "warm, fuzzy feeling" from helping cancer research than you will knowing you compiled all your own source.

graspee
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by Anonymous+DWord · 2002-02-13 08:56 · Score: 2

It's still Windows only, but it's possible to run it under Wine.

--
"If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · 2002-02-13 09:12 · Score: 1

Maybe if they weren't so silent, it would get done. ;)

--
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by Arandir · 2002-02-13 09:37 · Score: 1

Why does KDE produce binaries for a few selected Linux distros, but not for other distros or other operating systems?

Simply because the users of those distros have demonstrated that they need their hands held to get anything done. Debian GNU/Linux doesn't need KDE to provide it with binaries. Debian makes them itself. FreeBSD doesn't need KDE to provide it with binaries. FreeBSD makes them itself. Ditto for all the other systems and distros.

So how do you get binaries for FreeBSD? Go download them from FreeBSD. Or use ports. Or pkg_add -R. Further information can be found at freebsd.kde.org

--
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by Arandir · 2002-02-13 09:41 · Score: 1

Where did you get your compiler?

Where did your get your binaries. They could all have trojans direct from distribution. What? You trust your distribution? Well I guess InfinityEdge trusts FreeBSD to provide him with an untainted compiler and the source to rebuild it from.

--
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by Arandir · 2002-02-13 09:45 · Score: 1

No, KDE does actually release binaries for a few selected Linux distros.

--
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by grrussel · 2002-02-13 10:27 · Score: 1

Binary packages are made by distributors. KDE only provides source code. If your distribution isn't supported, complain to them. SuSE provide builds of KDE all nicely packaged on its linuks web page.
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by fishebulb · 2002-02-13 11:08 · Score: 1

offtopic question, who will own that cure when it is found. Will it be immediately patented by the company running this and then sold for profit. most likely
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by JabberWokky · 2002-02-13 11:24 · Score: 5, Insightful

Why does KDE produce binaries for a few selected Linux distros, but not for other distros or other operating systems?
KDE does not produce any binaries.
Let me say that again: KDE DOES NOT PRODUCE BINARIES... they ONLY release source. Any binaries that are available at a version release were created by the distros themselves. It's in just about every single FAQ that KDE produces.
KDE aims for portability against just about every X and *nix out there, including AIX, Solaris, BSD and Linux. I mention those in particular because there are KDE developers who use each as their primary platform. About the only drawback to the "source only" policy is the occasional distro that releases a binary with all the debugging turned on, or gif support turned off, etc. But that has gotten more rare with better documentation.
--
Evan

--
"$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by Arandir · 2002-02-13 14:14 · Score: 1

I understand that KDE does not actually create and build the binaries that are on their site, but they are still on their site. According to my dictionary, that is one definition of "produce", as in "he produced a binary from within the nether regions of the ftp site."

So let me rephrase the orginal question: "Why does KDE offer binaries for a few selected Linux distros, but not for other distros or other operating systems?"

--
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by Arandir · 2002-02-13 14:20 · Score: 2

Geez, everyone and their grandma is yelling at the top of their lungs that KDE only provides source code. I'm stunned. Frankly I'm flabbergasted. Have I been operating under a false assumption all these years? It woulnd't have been the first time.

Let me check...

...hmmmmm....

Oh, look here! ftp://ftp.kde.org/pub/kde/stable/2.2.2/ provides binaries for SEVEN different operating systems and distros! These aren't links to those respective systems, but bonafide binaries on the actual genuine KDE site!

--
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by uchian · 2002-02-13 14:49 · Score: 2

I'd guess they are provided by kindly soles who run those distros themselves/

If your distro isn't there, and you REALLY think it should be, and if you feel that strong about it, then why don't you add to the collection?
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by JabberWokky · 2002-02-13 15:59 · Score: 2

So let me rephrase the orginal question: "Why does KDE offer binaries for a few selected Linux distros, but not for other distros or other operating systems?"
Well, why not read what the debian binary packager has to say on the subject... from dot.kde.org:
" I hope to have the .deb's out soon, but remember: I have a life, too. I have school, work, and more. I also have a gf 220km away, which will take up most of my weekend except for Saturday, because I didn't see her today.
"You'll get the debs when I have time. In the meantime, deal with KDE2.2."
So, that's the reason. There's probably a very human volunteer behind the FreeBSD binaries who is trying to balance a life and doing the packaging - very precision work on a very large package with long compile time. Why don't *you* do it, eh?
--
Evan

--
"$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by mrmag00 · 2002-02-13 16:09 · Score: 1

Now heres someone who doesn't know what freebsd is. His compiler was installed when his OS was installed, and all his applications have been insalled with md5-checksums on compilation (unless he specifies not to). So unless he got his freebsd install and cvs updates from hackme.scr1ptkiddie.com then he should be ok.

of course, if the administrator is incompetant he could easily have been hacked and files then modified, but thats beyond the scope :)
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by Arandir · 2002-02-13 17:36 · Score: 1

I realize it's a hell of a lot of work making KDE packages. An awful lot of work. I certainly don't expect every distro to have packages ready five minutes after a KDE release.

But maybe I again misphrased the question. I'm not blaming anyone, certainly not KDE, Debian or other distros. All I'm wondering is why KDE chooses to offer binaries for some distros and not for others. Maybe it's just a rhetorical question without an answer.

--
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by Arandir · 2002-02-13 17:45 · Score: 1

That's not the point. The point is that a thousand people are posting here at the top of their lungs that KDE doesn't provide binaries at all. But it turns out that they DO provide binaries for a few distros.

You know, if someone said "the sun is green", and I point out that it is not, it's quite strange to get a reply to the effect "if you don't like the color why don't you go repaint it yourself?"

--
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by JabberWokky · 2002-02-13 17:58 · Score: 2

KDE chooses to offer binaries for some distros and not for others.
Okay... one last time. KDE does not provide any binaries. Period. End of story. The KDE developers only offer source. No more.
When a release is planned, some distros, *not* KDE developers, make binary packages. In cases like SuSE, they are made by paid employees. In cases like debian or Tru64 (Compaq's Unix), they are made by someone who voluntered to do so. Just before the announcement, anybody who wants can tell KDE "Hey, I made a package for my OS or my distro. It's located at this ftp site". Thus, *anybody* who wants can have their binaries listed in the announcement. KDE even goes so far as to mirror the binaries. But they do not provide them. Anybody who has a binary done by the announcement can have it listed in the official announcement. The people who create the Red Hat, debian Solaris and AIX packages didn't get theirs done in time. SuSE, Slackware, Mandrake and Tru64 did.
Is that answer clear enough? KDE mirrors and puts links to the binaries in the annoucements. They don't even check to see if they work - and in the past, there have been cases where the packages didn't. It's not KDE's position to test the binaries, as they don't have anything to do with them other than providing handy pointers to where they are. The only product of the KDE Team is source. End of story.
It's a bit like asking the kernel maintainers: "Why do you only release kernel versions for some distros and not others?" Again, all they do is release source, not binaries. It's up to the distros to compile for whatever target platform they choose to support, and package it however they wish.
--
Evan

--
"$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by Rob+Kaper · 2002-02-13 18:44 · Score: 2

Oh, look here! ftp://ftp.kde.org/pub/kde/stable/2.2.2/ provides binaries for SEVEN different operating systems and distros! These aren't links to those respective systems, but bonafide binaries on the actual genuine KDE site!

It is still true that we do not make the binaries. Distributors do. Those binaries are placed there for your convenience, but it is still the responsibility of the packager to create them.

I guess we could remove all those binaries from the site though, if that'd make you happy. ;-)
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by roie_m · 2002-02-13 21:49 · Score: 1

The answer is hat KDE "chooses" to include binaries that are submitted to them. If nobody gave them FreeBSD binaries, they won't include them. As simple as that.
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by Vampyr · 2002-02-13 23:12 · Score: 1

Hardly silent.
http://freebsd.kde.org

There's a mailing list available, join it and contribute.

The reason we don't have packages for FreeBSD yet? The machine we use to build them out of CVS is out of action due to hardware issues.

Within another week or two we will have pre-release packages to test, and testers are welcome to help shake out the bugs

As for people who get warm fuzzy feelings from self-compiling, you should understand that the packages *are* the ports, built for you on a big fast build-system, to save you the time.

They're identical to what you'd get from building the port.
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by spot · 2002-02-14 00:01 · Score: 1

better yet run electric sheep, the distributed screen saver that evolves fractal life forms (it's pretty!).

--
Scott Draves
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by Arandir · 2002-02-14 20:02 · Score: 1

Okay... one last time. There are binaries available at the KDE ftp sites. They are not links to locations elsewhere, but actual, god fearing, bonafide binaries.

--
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by JabberWokky · 2002-02-15 04:35 · Score: 2

*Sigh*. Okay, let's quote from the actual announcement. If it comes from the actual announcement itself, maybe you're believe it?
Please note that the KDE team makes these packages available from the KDE web site as a convenience to KDE users. The KDE project is not responsible for these packages as they are provided by third parties -- typically, but not always, the distributor of the relevant distribution. If you cannot find a binary package for your distribution, please check again later or read the KDE Binary Package Policy.
--
Evan

--
"$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by Arandir · 2002-02-19 15:53 · Score: 1

See, they're admitting that they make "these packages available from the KDE web site."

--
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Re:what about FreeBSD binaries? by JabberWokky · 2002-02-19 16:13 · Score: 2

Yes, and Sourceforge makes quite a few programs available from their site. Who do you write to when a binary is not avilable? Sourceforge, or the person who makes the binary package?
KDE hosts them, but does not make them.
--
Evan

--
"$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien

hmm by nomadic · 2002-02-13 07:53 · Score: 1, Funny

Only on slashdot would the third pre-release of a software package be considered front page news.

No, I'm not complaining, I just think it's funny...

Slackware support! by OpCode42 · 2002-02-13 07:54 · Score: 3, Interesting

Hurrah, they've provided slakpacks!

Ive been using it today, its very nice. I wasnt a fan of KDE2, and at first glance this is just kde2 with bells and whistles. However, there are subtle changes and integrations that make it much nicer to work with on a daily basis.

Konquerer is a little buggy though (crashes every time i press the Back button)

Cant wait for the final release!

As CmdrTaco says... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-02-13 07:55 · Score: 5, Funny

"You get what you pay for after all."

-Rob Malda

How useful can KDE be?

Re:As CmdrTaco says... by Sj0 · 2002-02-13 08:55 · Score: 3, Funny

Slightly more useful than a pirated copy of windows, aparantly... :)

--
It's been a long time.
Re:As CmdrTaco says... by __past__ · 2002-02-13 09:03 · Score: 1

Which isn't neccessarily true for CmdrTaco...

--
Programming can be fun again. Film at 11.
Re:As CmdrTaco says... by Sj0 · 2002-02-13 09:10 · Score: 2

I'll give you that -- but *only* because I like games. If it wasn't for that, it'd take a pretty useless human being to match the uselessness of a pirated copy of Windows. :)

--
It's been a long time.

Who Really Needs 3.0? by 4of12 · 2002-02-13 07:56 · Score: 3, Interesting

I was pretty happy with KDE 1 and remain happy with KDE 2.0

I'm sure to get Troll -1'd into oblivion for this, but

Why is KDE 3.0 so good that it's worth getting excited about from the standpoint of the end user?

--
"Provided by the management for your protection."

Re:Who Really Needs 3.0? by WasterDave · 2002-02-13 08:02 · Score: 2

Nothing really that earth shattering, but it does link against QT3 rather than QT2, hence the major version number bump.

Dave

--
I write a blog now, you should be afraid.
Re:Who Really Needs 3.0? by PeterClark · 2002-02-13 08:12 · Score: 5, Informative

Well, you've already been moderated as flamebait, but I don't think that's the case, so I'll respond.

First of all, the major reason for KDE3 is QT3. QT3 has several advantages over QT2 for developers, and the KDE project want to use these to their advantage. As an end user, you probably won't be aware immediately of the changes, but developers will, which means that better programs will be coming your way.

Also, look at http://developer.kde.org/development-versions/kde- 3.0-features.html to get an idea of what's being added in KDE3. Then you can decide for yourself whether KDE3 is worth it. :)

:Peter
Re:Who Really Needs 3.0? by stilborne · 2002-02-13 09:14 · Score: 5, Informative

besides Qt3 (which others have pointed out) there are a number of new features and general improvements. for example the javascript and html engines are both much better/faster than what was in kde2. directory listing is much faster, the file dialog has been spiffed up a bit more, there is support for file information plugins that appear on mouse over (not to mention animated icons), improved imap and gpg support in kmail, dcop has been improved tremendously from the viewpoint of scripting, aRts is much improved with the new GSL engine (cooperation with GNOME!), some new eye-candy like animated window decorations and new thumbnail types, tons of bug fixes and speed ups etc.. etc.. etc...

this is very much an evolutionary release as opposed to a revolutionary one (as KDE2.0 was), but the changes are quite noticeable. they make the general kde experience smoother and more useful IMO. one nice thing about it being evolutionary is that it is immediately stable and familiar ...
Re:Who Really Needs 3.0? by lazarius · 2002-02-13 10:55 · Score: 1

Two words (that are important to me if it works): USB Visors. My visor won't sync up with KPilot in 2.2.1 (I think). It will with whatever the tty app is, but that's a bit too much work. And this is available just in time too... I'm in my last year of High School... MIKE

--
Beware the JabberOrk.
Re:Who Really Needs 3.0? by m_ilya · 2002-02-13 14:08 · Score: 1

Primary reason why I will upgrade to next stable release ASAP is konqueror. It is becomes better and better with each release but it is not good enought yet (that is there too many sites where it still doesn't work correctly).

--
--
Ilya Martynov (http://martynov.org/)
Re:Who Really Needs 3.0? by the_arrow · 2002-02-14 17:37 · Score: 1

Well, all this sounds fine (and I have already downloaded the whole thing ;), but what about double-click?

I want single-click to select things (files/directories/etc.) and double-click to open them. So far I haven't seen anything that turns this feature on.

--
/ The Arrow
"How lovely you are. So lovely in my straightjacket..." - Nny
Re:Who Really Needs 3.0? by stilborne · 2002-02-15 08:57 · Score: 1

in the control center, go to Periferals -> Mouse and look in the Icons area ... it has been there since KDE2

What I'm looking forward to... by PeterClark · 2002-02-13 07:59 · Score: 4, Interesting

I have been a KDE fan ever since last summer, when I finally got the hardware to support it. :) It's been my primary desktop environment ever since, although (probably due to something getting borked upstream) I'm having to use Fluxbox until the memory and performance issues in the current Debian Sid KDE go away.

Anywho, the feature that I've been most looking forward to is tabbed browsing in Konqueror, due to appear in KDE 3.1. Galeon is the one constantly used app that isn't a part of KDE, and I use it because a.) it has tabbed support and b.) a smart bookmarks toolbar. Plus, it's a web browser. Nothing more, nothing less. Konqueror has various view settings (such as "file manager", "web browser", and whatnot, but in my experience, the different view settings don't always play nice. But since tabs are at the top of my wishlist, I will definitely reconsider Konqueror in the near future.

So, what are all you other KDE fans looking forward to?

:Peter

Re:What I'm looking forward to... by xanadu-xtroot.com · 2002-02-13 08:09 · Score: 2

So, what are all you other KDE fans looking forward to?

Waiting to see how short of a time span it is for my current download to timeout because of being posted on the /. front page. :-)

--
I'm not a prophet or a stone-age man,
I'm just a mortal with potential of a super man.
Re:What I'm looking forward to... by brunes69 · 2002-02-13 08:36 · Score: 5, Informative

I agree with the tabbed browsing, I can't wait for t to appear in 3.1. But the smart bookmarks toolbar; I find that vastly inferior to Konqueror's web shortcuts feature, mainly because it is so much simpler to use. Why do I need a bulky toolbar cluttering up my screen when I can just type "php:fopen" to search the php manual, or "rf:gaim" to search freshmeat? It's very cool. if you've never tried this feature, go into your konqueror settings under "Enhanced Browsing". It's very easy to add your own sites.
Re:What I'm looking forward to... by srussell · 2002-02-13 09:10 · Score: 1

Just the opposite :-)
I'm looking forward to WebDAV support in Konqueror, and (I haven't checked to see if/when this will be included) SVG support. And even more KIO plugins! camera://!! ssh://! dav://!! The whole world as an URL!
Mwahahahahahaaa!
Re:What I'm looking forward to... by Dr.Dubious+DDQ · 2002-02-13 10:07 · Score: 2

So, what are all you other KDE fans looking forward to?
The improved javascript support. It's the one place where I still occasionally run into problems using Konqueror, but so far the KDE3 CVS snapshots have been looking much improved over KDE2 in this department...

--
Hacker Public Radio is our Friend
Re:What I'm looking forward to... by xanadu-xtroot.com · 2002-02-13 12:06 · Score: 3

or "rf:gaim" to search freshmeat?

I just thought I'd make a correction for people who are not familiar with this (totally freakin' awesome) feature.

rf:gaim - The "rf" is for searching RPMFind.net
fm:gaim - The "fm" is for searching FreshMeat

You can see many more things available to you by going to:

Control Center --> Web Browsing --> Enhanced Browsing

Very cool stuff...

--
I'm not a prophet or a stone-age man,
I'm just a mortal with potential of a super man.
Re:What I'm looking forward to... by wedg · 2002-02-13 17:03 · Score: 1

Hey, opera's had it since its inception. Good to see everyone else is catching on.

Me? I use XFCE, with Opera 5.01 (for Linux plugin support). Why? XFCE has everything I ever used in KDE, and Opera rocks.

And XFCE runs a lot lighter and has a lot better window docking support for non XFCE-specific apps (e.g. all of them).

Yarg.

--
Jake
Dating: while( 1 ){ call_girl(); get_rejected(); drink_40(); } return 0;

Better, faster, higher by wiredog · 2002-02-13 08:00 · Score: 2

Oh wait, that's the Olympics. Still true about KDE 3, though.

--

Best Slashdot Co

The burning question... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-02-13 08:07 · Score: 1, Informative

are they making it tighter and faster or just adding features?

This is the SINGLE most important question asked on slashdot about KDE 3.0

Re:The burning question... by praedor · 2002-02-13 08:35 · Score: 1, Redundant

Mostly little tweaks, bug fixes (and introduction of a few more). Think of it as primarily a KDE 2.2.x port to the new QT 3.0. It does have a few new features but overall, just tweaks. This one is supposed to migrate your 2.2.x settings to 3.0 rather nicely - EXCEPT for kmail. Kmail is probably worse off in these 3.0 betas than anything else. It will not import your 2.2.x kmail address book, you get to recreate that sucker from scratch.

Take a look at a review of this beta at: http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/reviews/404 6/1/

It nicely covers the ins and outs, good and bad of the present beta.

--
In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
Re:The burning question... by stilborne · 2002-02-13 09:23 · Score: 1

this is a great example of how open source is supposed to work. the developers were busy fixing other bugs when a user/tester trying out a beta release noticed that their old address book didn't import and complains very loudly about it. so what happened next? it got fixed. your old addy book will indeed get imported automagically for you in 3.0.

this is exactly why there are beta and RC releases: so testers can spot problems, report them, and get them fixed.
Re:The burning question... by praedor · 2002-02-14 04:02 · Score: 2

Coolamundo. I wasn't criticizing KDE 3.0, just pointing out a few issues that existed when the beta was first released. Fast work, nice work. I may give it a shot now - but first will have to inventory my software to make sure nothing will crap out because of the incompatibility between kde 2.2.x apps and kde 3.0 apps (due to QT 3.0 yes?).

--
In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
Re:The burning question... by stilborne · 2002-02-14 12:30 · Score: 1

just keep your qt2/kde2 libs around. that way apps that link to qt2/kde2 will continue to work.

The greatest feature about KDE3... by rseuhs · 2002-02-13 08:08 · Score: 4, Informative

Is that it's quite the same as KDE2 and NOT a major rewrite.

I know a lot of people who were scared away from KDE2.0's unstability and bugs.

It's a marketing-thing. People tend to only try out .0 releases, so a 3.0 release that is in reality a 2.3 is the best thing that can happen to KDE :-)

The second-best feature of KDE 3.0 is the configuration of animated pics, BTW ;-)

Re:The greatest feature about KDE3... by rseuhs · 2002-02-13 09:23 · Score: 2

No, I did not want to say that this is a marketing-plot, I said a lot more people are going to try it because it's a .0 release (which is a marketing-thing).
Of course I know that it's binary incompatible with KDE2, but that's irrelevant for somebody who tries KDE for the first time. (And KDE 3.0 will get *A LOT* of first-time triers, a lot more than a KDE 2.x would get.)
Re:The greatest feature about KDE3... by bero-rh · 2002-02-13 10:43 · Score: 3, Informative

It's a marketing-thing.

No, it's a "we may change the API and ABI in major releases" thing.

One of the main points of KDE 3.0 is the switch to Qt 3.0, which brings many advantages, but also breaks the existing ABI (and to a small extent, API).

--
This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html

Redhat? by L-Wave · 2002-02-13 08:09 · Score: 2, Interesting

Sad sad, they never had redhat packages, even beta 1 *still* doesn't have them... oh well, (the reason i am not installing the tarballs is because its beta, i dont want to clutter my FS if it doesnt work right. anyways, thats my 2 cents =)

--
I SURVIVED THE GREAT SLASHDOT BLACKOUT OF 2002!

Re:Redhat? by rseuhs · 2002-02-13 08:16 · Score: 1, Flamebait

RedHat hates KDE, that's why they do as few packages as possible.
(Yes, it's RedHat's fault that there are no RH-packages, not KDE's. All other distros are also doing their packages on their own.)
Re:Redhat? by L-Wave · 2002-02-13 08:24 · Score: 2

IS the really true? Rawhide dir shows rpms of the cvs version of kde. I suppose they are built for the next version of RH, but you can't really say redhat hates kde (why would they ship it then?)

--
I SURVIVED THE GREAT SLASHDOT BLACKOUT OF 2002!
Re:Redhat? by rseuhs · 2002-02-13 09:07 · Score: 2

you can't really say redhat hates kde (why would they ship it then?)
Don't you remember the times when RedHat refused to ship the opensource-but-not-GPL (the HORROR) Qt, but did ship the then closed-source and commercial Netscape?
RedHat simply had to ship KDE because it is wanted by the users.
But obviously Bob Young is still using Gnome.
Re:Redhat? by MSG · 2002-02-13 09:25 · Score: 5, Interesting

*cough*bullshit*cough*

"Red Hat" doesn't hate KDE. Bero is a big KDE advocate, and maintains daily builds here:
http://www.linux-easy.com/daily/

Red Hat probably doesn't provide packages through other channels because they aren't going to support them. The KDE people are free to use the packages that Bero's put up, and they have in the past.
Re:Redhat? by MSG · 2002-02-13 09:30 · Score: 2

Um... At that time, neither Red Hat nor Debian was shipping KDE due to licensing conflicts. KDE was under GPL. It depended on QT, which was not licensed in a compatible manner, which isn't allowed by the GPL.

Note that this situation was not resolved by Red Hat bending to their users requests, but by Trolltech's licensing QT under the GPL.

Netscape may have been closed-source and commercial, but its license allowed Red Hat to distribute it, and no GPL'd applications linked against its closed-source libraries.
Re:Redhat? by Peter+H.S. · 2002-02-13 09:37 · Score: 2

RedHat hates KDE, that's why they do as few packages as possible.
Come on! KDE has been a part of RH distroes since RH 5.2 (?)

Bero (maintainer of the RH KDE rpms) from RH is working very hard on KDE.
He even has a home page with automatically build rpms from daily cvs snapshots.
Their testing style is different, though, and probably more agressive:
KDE 3.0 is found in Red Hats Raw Hide dir. But instead of releasing a whole KDE 3.0 beta 1, then a beta 2, etc, they release batches of incremental improved rpms, often from daily KDE 3 cvs snapshots.
So generaly speaking, RH KDE 3 rpms are much more recent, than those builds found from other vendors on ftp.kde.org.
The upside from this strategy is, that eg. a showstopper bug reported to bugzilla, can be eradicated quickly. The downside is, that a new batch of eg, KDE-networking rpms may break everything, and that everything goes so fast . (eg . I reported a bug known from the changelog, because of that).

One of the reasons, I believe, for RH to sport such an aggressive testing strategy is, that the next RH release will be build entirely with the GCC 3.x
compiler. KDE 3.0 (alpha and first beta at least) couldn't be build with gcc 3.x, and a lot of fixes were probably necessary.
If KDE 3.0 is stable when RH 8.0* hits the market, you can be sure they will include it.

* I think they are going to bump up the version, since an entire distro build around gcc 3.x, is a major step. (compat gcc for all the 2.7x, /2.9x source code).
And yes! cups (www.cups.org) look like it is going in too. A very, very cool printing system. IBM's JFS is going in too, and of course, KDE 3.0

Regards
Re:Redhat? by rseuhs · 2002-02-13 09:40 · Score: 2

Yes, one RedHat-employee is actually doing something for KDE.
Nevertheless, the rest of RedHat doesn't give it very much support (just like you said):
Red Hat probably doesn't provide packages through other channels because they aren't going to support them.
Re:Redhat? by rseuhs · 2002-02-13 09:48 · Score: 1, Flamebait

Um... At that time, neither Red Hat nor Debian was shipping KDE due to licensing conflicts. KDE was under GPL. It depended on QT, which was not licensed in a compatible manner, which isn't allowed by the GPL.
Did you read my post? Obviously not, because it's exactly what I said.
It's pretty obvious that the licence holders (the KDE-authors) had nothing against linking it with Qt, so many distributions shipped Qt and KDE and were not sued for it by the KDE-team. This whole licensing-thing is none of RedHat's business anyway.
Note that this situation was not resolved by Red Hat bending to their users requests, but by Trolltech's licensing QT under the GPL.
Yeah, Trolltech realized that using the GPL instead of QPL would change nada except taking an argument away from the KDE-haters.
Re:Redhat? by rseuhs · 2002-02-13 10:31 · Score: 2

BTW:
AFAIR RedHat was shipping KDE before the change of Qt's license, so obviously the license-issues weren't that important for RedHat anyway.
Oh yeah, I remember quite well when debian was the only distro not shipping KDE....
Re:Redhat? by HeUnique · 2002-02-13 11:04 · Score: 2

GCC 3.1, and a newer version of glibc and lots of bleeding edge stuff

--
Hetz (Heunique)
Re:Redhat? by bero-rh · 2002-02-13 11:08 · Score: 5, Informative

This has nothing to do with likes or dislikes of a particular desktop (you'll notice there are no RPMs for the recent GNOME 2.0 alpha either).

There will be packages for beta2 later (probably some time tomorrow); the problem is sheer lack of time. I've tried, but still haven't found a way to work more than 24 hours a day.

And generally, building alpha/beta packages for previous releases is pretty low on my priority list (if you look at rawhide, you'll see KDE 3.0 post-beta2 has been in there for a couple of days).

Getting the next release (7.3, 8.0, Linux XP or whatever it will be called ;) ) right is much more important (especially because next release + KDE 3.0 will be an officially supported configuration, 7.2 + KDE 3.0 isn't and probably won't be, releasing such a large errata that even breaks binary compatibility is not very likely to happen).

But FYI, I'm currently building the beta2 packages for 7.2 on x86, ia64 and alpha in a different tty.

kdelibs, kdebase, kdeadmin and kdemultimedia are done, kdegraphics requires some more work because of different gphoto versions, and I haven't started on the others.

--
This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html
Re:Redhat? by bero-rh · 2002-02-13 11:16 · Score: 3, Insightful

One of the reasons, I believe, for RH to sport such an aggressive testing strategy is, that the next RH release will be build entirely with the GCC 3.x compiler

That, and the fact that I don't think it makes sense to leave a version with known bugs in there for too long. A week from now, most of the commonly noticed problems with beta2 will be fixed in CVS, while possibly introducing new ones. Those new ones are the ones we need to know about. (We aren't planning to ship anything official with beta2 - so bugs specific to that version don't matter much - getting bug reports about things that are already fixed is not very useful).

If KDE 3.0 is stable when RH 8.0* hits the market, you can be sure they will include it.

That's the plan (no comment on the version number though). We generally don't throw stuff into rawhide that we aren't planning to ship.

And yes! cups (www.cups.org) look like it is going in too.

It's going in, and Qt, KDE and wine are built with cups support.

--
This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html

Mod this up by wiredog · 2002-02-13 08:09 · Score: 1, Offtopic

Just to fuck with him.

Unless that's his plan... Sneaky...

--

Best Slashdot Co

No jumbo packages please by 2Bits · 2002-02-13 08:11 · Score: 5, Insightful

This applies to KDE as well as Gnome.

These two environments tend to come with huge packages (e.g. gnome-applets, kdenetwork, kdemultimedia, kdegraphics, koffice, ...).

Sometimes, you just need one or two in the packages, and you are forced to install the whole jumbo packages. Why? Why can't we pick and choose?

E.g. I use Kword sometimes for simple word processing, but I never use the spreadsheet and the presentation app. Same for kdenetwork. I use KMail and KNode, but I don't need korn,ktalkd,ksirc,.... And kdemultimedia, I don't do MIDI stuff, and I don't want to waste 10MB for timidity++ and other junks.

Oh yeah, same for Gnome. Why do I need to install the whole gnome-applet package if I only need one applet? Same for other jumbo packages.

I'm on RPM-based distro. How about apt-get-based?
I don't know the internal details of the code, but isn't there a way to separate them out?

Re:No jumbo packages please by ambrosius27 · 2002-02-13 08:37 · Score: 1

"Sometimes, you just need one or two in the packages, and you are forced to install the whole jumbo packages. "

Interesting. Often, GNOME is criticized for having too many small packages, which make compiling that much more difficult. The same may also be true for KDE. I just know that GNOME gets the opposite complaint frequently.

--

~~~~~~~~~
dissertus scribendo latine videri volo.
Re:No jumbo packages please by vanza · 2002-02-13 08:41 · Score: 2

Blame it on the packagers! :-)

I don't know if any other distribution does this, but Conectiva (www.conectiva.com) has per-application rpms in most cases. So, if you want just the CD player in kdemultimedia, you has to install only kdemultimedia-kscd.

It's really nice, and I hope more dists would do this. SuSE has something similiar, but not for the base packages (e.g., kdemultimedia comes in a big package, but "3rd-party" applications not included in the distribution have their own package and can be installed individually.)

--
Marcelo Vanzin
Re:No jumbo packages please by proxima · 2002-02-13 08:57 · Score: 3, Informative

To my knowledge, Debian KDE packages are separated. To install KWord, the dependency koffice-libs (to my recollection) is installed with it. I could be wrong (I'm not at my comp right now to check how apt-get handles everything), but when you do apt-get install koffice it installs all of the individual components quite nicely. Check out this page to see the list of KDE application packages. I also checked the library page and confirmed koffice-libs.

Granted, you get a small amount of bloat if you just want KWord (compared to a more standalone wordprocessor), but it beats the RPM distributions easily. The quality and ease with which KDE is handled in Debian was one of the major deciding factors in me switching to Debian from Red Hat.

--
"The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent." --Carl Sagan
Re:No jumbo packages please by ghislain_leblanc · 2002-02-13 09:25 · Score: 1

If you build from source you can choose by commenting some stuff in the Makefiles IIRC.

Or maybe it was in configure.in...

Anyways I'm pretty sure they mentionned it somewhere in the docs... (can't check now, @ work on W2K)

Good luck.
Re:No jumbo packages please by ichimunki · 2002-02-13 09:41 · Score: 1

Hmmm. I have the exact opposite complaint with Gnome. Way too many packages, and build order counts, so it can be fun to keep it all straight. KDE, OTOH, has always been a breeze because you really only needed a few tarballs to get up and running. And if you felt you were installing too much, you could go in and make parts of the packages individually, rather than doing a package level 'make all'.

But I compile from source for all non-base code. And in any case, both projects provide the code reliably--not packages. It's up to distros or volunteers to package stuff one way or another.

--
I do not have a signature
Re:No jumbo packages please by MarcQuadra · 2002-02-13 09:50 · Score: 1

I like to install the .srpm and then check the .spec file (usually in /usr/src/rpm/SPECS), sometimes you can 'turn off' unneeded components, remove uglified patches, and set options that you can't otherwise.

While you are poking around, check out /usr/lib/rpm/rpmrc, that file has all the optimization options for your cpu arch, I made KDE much snappier on my G3 by setting "-mcpu=750 -O3" in there and re-compiling.

--
"Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
Re:No jumbo packages please by KeyserDK · 2002-02-13 10:13 · Score: 1

Mandrake also does this. Check how many libs*.rpm they have.

Quite simple, all libs are placed in seperate packages, and not in the main package. This way you dont got the bloat but just the needed libs.

I dont know if Redhat has changed their policy also.

--
still reading?
Re:No jumbo packages please by bero-rh · 2002-02-13 10:48 · Score: 2

These two environments tend to come with huge packages (e.g. gnome-applets, kdenetwork, kdemultimedia, kdegraphics, koffice, ...).

Not necessarily.

Take a look at Raw Hide to see what the KDE packages are likely to look like in the next Red Hat Linux release.

I've decided to split up most of them.

--
This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html
Re:No jumbo packages please by Nailer · 2002-02-13 11:49 · Score: 2

I'm on RPM-based distro. How about apt-get-based?

Apt-get isn't a packaging system. I presume you probably mean Debian. My office has been using apt-get to maintain our Red Hat boxes for a few months now, and it works quite well. Regardless, the release of KDE 3 marks a good time for the KDE webmasters to save users a bit of time when fetching the latest release my making the packages for Red Hat, SuSE, etc into an APT repository. Its quite easy (we're already doing the same with KDE 2.2.2 at work) and I might volunteer myself if I have the time.
Re:No jumbo packages please by efgbr · 2002-02-13 11:53 · Score: 1

Conectiva Linux is rpm-based, apt-enabled and the KDE packages are split into individual packages.

Tips for SuSE users by Geek+Boy · 2002-02-13 08:17 · Score: 5, Informative

The suse packages have a few minor installation conflicts. Make sure you have the prereqs installed and just --force and it will work. They use a separate .kde dir (.kde3-testing) so that you don't lose your old kde2 environment. However they don't migrate up your old settings. You can do this by copying the .kde2/share/config and .kde2/share/apps directories into .kde3-testing/share before your launch kde after you update. kconf_update will migrate your settings forward.

I was unable to get the lisa package or kdevelop to install due to dependency problems, and I didn't try. Make sure you install the mesaglut-devel package. It's needed.

The packages install into /opt/kde3 and you have to log in with the kde3 session entry in kdm if you use that.

Known bugs so far:

- Browser identification doesn't always work correctly.

- Greek keyboard setting is giving me Russian characters instead for some reason. (this may or may not be a bug)

Re:Tips for SuSE users by Anonymous Coward · 2002-02-13 08:37 · Score: 1, Funny

- Greek keyboard setting is giving me Russian characters instead for some reason. (this may or may not be a bug)

You are partially correct, it is not a bug. The characters are not Cyrllic, they are Turkish.
Re:Tips for SuSE users by psocccer · 2002-02-13 08:53 · Score: 5, Funny

Make sure you install the mesaglut-devel package. It's needed.
Good to see they've finally included one of the most-needed functions ever for a geek, the megaslut package. I know I've been asking for it for a long time, I can't wait to see what kind of development stuff is in the devel- package...

looks again

Crap... Oh, mesaglut... well, I guess it's back to autopr0n...

--
Free Online Woodworking Resources Directory

Re:KDE - Beta is stable by Geek+Boy · 2002-02-13 08:19 · Score: 3, Informative

Just make sure you keep KDE2 libraries around and your old KDE2 apps will still work. They just won't directly interoperate with KDE3 apps. For instance, you can't embed old modules/plugins into new applications.

Anyone for Usability? by WebWiz · 2002-02-13 08:23 · Score: 2, Interesting

Just curious how much human factors goes into the development of open source desktop packages? Are there members of the KDE or QT or Gnome teams whose sole job/interest is to further the usability of the interfaces? Or are the developers just happening to "place this here" or "place this there? Are the beta testers assuming the role of Usability testing?

-Webwiz.....

Re:Anyone for Usability? by __past__ · 2002-02-13 08:33 · Score: 2, Insightful

Well, for Gnome, there was a Sun sponsored usability study, IIRC.
However, such a study doesn't improve usability on it's own, it just states that it has to be improved. You can tell a crappy UI coder that he is just that over and over, he won't get better just because of this.
KDE also has Usability page, but there seem to be more active KDE subprojects...
(Note that I don't want to imply that Gnome has more crappy UI coders than KDE. Both have their share, and both have great ones.)

--
Programming can be fun again. Film at 11.
Re:Anyone for Usability? by ambrosius27 · 2002-02-13 08:45 · Score: 2, Informative

I can't speak for KDE (though I believe they have a Usability team), but look here for the GNOME Usability Project (aka GUP). I know that Sun has done user testing on GNOME.

--

~~~~~~~~~
dissertus scribendo latine videri volo.
Re:Anyone for Usability? by elflord · 2002-02-13 09:27 · Score: 2

Java doesn't have a UI. It abstracts the user interfaces of other systems. This leads to lowest-common demoninator problems, at least in the case of AWT.
Re:Anyone for Usability? by stilborne · 2002-02-13 09:30 · Score: 1

first of all, there are style guidelines that KDE apps are to follow. this keeps most problems at bay.

second, there is a mailing list and a web site for the kde usability project, which is basically a group of usability pros, hackers and general users who are interested in improving the usability of KDE

finally, beta testers and even users of stable releases are an extremeley important resource for usability and quality feedback for the KDE project.

so its a little bit of everything, really =) it just requires that people get involved, which thankfully many do.

Re:KDE - Beta is stable by lemonhed · 2002-02-13 08:27 · Score: 2, Insightful

Good point.

But that actually raises another concern. Why didnt they make KDE3 backward compatible with KDE2? KDE2 is compatible with KDE.

I have alot of KDE2 applications running and I know it will be difficult to maintain both sets and remember which works with which set of libraries. Its sort of like the whoel GLIB problem (e.g., 2.2)

KDE 3 by Satai · 2002-02-13 08:32 · Score: 4, Interesting

I'm really looking forward to KDE 3.

No, not because of the move to QT3.

No, not because of the improvements in Konq, KFM, or any of those - not even the multi-key shortcuts.

I just want to be able to use KMail for my Maildir mailboxes. I know there are hacks, workarounds, all that - but I don't want those. I just want to be able to plug in and go. Right now I use Mutt, but sometime in the future I'd like to be able to do some of the things it doesn't - like inline HTML viewing. KMail won't be for regular use, I guarantee it, but it will certainly be a nice complement to mutt.

A very close second is the switching of desktops when dragging a window - that's on the "KDE 3 List" and it's definitely something I miss from E. I don't know if it's going to be in 3, but I also really miss the ability to "walk off the edges" of the desktop and switch to a different virtual desktop. I've got the keyboard shortcuts set up, but it just isn't the same.

Re:KDE 3 by Geek+Boy · 2002-02-13 08:35 · Score: 2

Yes all that functionality is available and working in KDE3, including in the just-release beta2.

Re:KDE - Beta is stable by Geek+Boy · 2002-02-13 08:32 · Score: 3, Informative

KDE1 was not even close to binary compatible with KDE2. Anyways, KDE3 broken binary compatibility because Qt broke it with Qt3 so it was a good opportunity. The transition shouldn't take too long before you have all KDE 3.0 applications though. Don't worry, it won't be that painful.

Part of the job of the beta is to get people porting their apps to KDE3 too.

Of course they can split it up... by FooBarWidget · 2002-02-13 08:37 · Score: 1

But then people will complain about unnecessary dependencies.
And then somebody will start a flamewar about that at Slashdot and the trolls will eat them alive!
You see? They have no choice!

KDE 3.0 by saintlupus · 2002-02-13 08:50 · Score: 3, Interesting

I haven't had any luck getting the 2.x family of KDE to build on an OpenBSD box, whether the hardware was x86 or PPC. Which sucks, because I really want to use Konq, and Mozilla won't build at all under Open.

Urg.

Anyhow, has anyone managed to build one of the 3.0 betas under OpenBSD?

--saint

Re:KDE 3.0 by __past__ · 2002-02-13 09:01 · Score: 1

You do realize that KDE2 is in the the OpenBSD ports collection? And that there are binary packages for both i386 and PPC for the unlikely case you can't compile them yourself?
However, the Mozilla issue does suck indeed.

--
Programming can be fun again. Film at 11.
Re:KDE 3.0 by saintlupus · 2002-02-13 09:15 · Score: 2

You do realize that KDE2 is in the the OpenBSD ports collection [openbsd.org]?

I do indeed. Unfortunately, when I do the standard cd /usr/ports/x11/kde && make && make install, it gets a little of the way through and then dies on me.

For whatever reason, I didn't think to try to precompiled binaries ; I'll give that a shot tonight. But now I am curious about the port problem.

(Not that being in the ports is a guarantee that the software will work; mozilla is in the ports as well, but its a documented fact that it won't run under OpenBSD.)

--saint
Re:KDE 3.0 by __past__ · 2002-02-13 09:49 · Score: 1

I once had a similar problem. It died while linking some monster libs, due to the quite restrictive resource limits. Try to compile it as root (IIRC, a simple "su" won't help, you need a "real" login).

--
Programming can be fun again. Film at 11.
Re:KDE 3.0 by saintlupus · 2002-02-13 11:58 · Score: 2

For whatever reason, I didn't think to try to precompiled binaries ; I'll give that a shot tonight. But now I am curious about the port problem.

I know, replying to my own post is bad form, but the precompiled binaries do work fine; at last, a browser that _isn't_ netscape running in linux emulation mode! Konq and konsole alone are worth the disk space for the whole KDE bundle.

--saint

KDE Clipboard by sfrenchie · 2002-02-13 08:50 · Score: 1

Is it just me, or does the KDE clipboard functionality just annoy the hell out of YOU too? I'm talking (complaining) about how when you select text, it automatically gets copied to the clipboard. This SUCKS...why would it do that automatically. If I wanted to copy the text then I'd -c it. This is reallly annoying when programming since I come from a windows background. I'll get modded for this but... windows got it right, KDE needs to just copy it instead of trying to 1-up it. I REALLY hope this gets fixed.

--

"The scientist describes what is; The engineer creates what never was." - Theodore von Karman

Re:KDE Clipboard by captredballs · 2002-02-13 09:00 · Score: 2, Informative

Apparently they are making the cut-copy functionality more configurable so that you can have windows style (Ctrl-C) or unix style (highlight). It sounds like it will also integrate with other apps (gpm?) better.

I can't find it now, but I swear that I've read it.

Or maybe you are just a troll.

--

I suppose I'm not too threatening, presently, but wait till I start Nautilus
Re:KDE Clipboard by Capt.+DrunkenBum · 2002-02-13 09:24 · Score: 1

Learn to use it my friend.. After a few weeks of trying to take advantage of the KDE klipboard, you will never go back..

I was like you, when I first tried it. But after a couple of weeks I found I couldn't live without it. It drives me nuts to not have it when I am at work being forced to use NT4.

--
Not everyone deserves a 320i
Re:KDE Clipboard by Dr.Dubious+DDQ · 2002-02-13 09:24 · Score: 2

Your wish is granted - the default behavior of the clipboard has changed in KDE3 (much to MY annoyance, I LIKE being able to highlight to copy).

Fortunately, this is configurable. If you want the old copy-on-highlight behavior, click the "synchronise clipboard on highlight" option in the preferences...

--
Hacker Public Radio is our Friend
Re:KDE Clipboard by lkaos · 2002-02-13 09:53 · Score: 2

I have to problems with this post.

(1) This is by no means a bug and has been standard Unix behavior for some time. Just because it doesn't work the same in Windows, doesn't mean it's a bug.

(2) If your programming, why the hell would you be using the mouse to copy stuff??? Wouldn't you be using C-k or C-xrk like a normal person? Sheesh, my only compliant about KDE is that it encourages people to use lesser tools (KDeveloper) when better tools exist (Emacs). One would think that FS projects would borrow code from each other...

Even if your not using Emacs, if your a programmer and your stuck to a mouse, your productivity has to be hurting... Even on Windows, I still use the keyboard to copy and paste.

--
int func(int a);
func((b += 3, b));
Re:KDE Clipboard by sfrenchie · 2002-02-13 10:08 · Score: 1

I have three problems with this post. (1) I never called it a bug...I just said it annoyes the hell out of me. (2) Why wouldn't I use the mouse to copy stuff? Are you claiming that if I need 5 words in the middle of a row I should get them with my keyboard? Nuts to that. I might be a gen-Xer, but I need my mouse, I'm not going to slow myself cause some unix guy dreams of a world without mice. (3) "...using C-k or C-xrk like a normal person?" Now I'm abnormal for using a mouse? Sorry bud but you just aren't making sense Finally, I challenge you to a programming duel to see who is more productive...meet me at the swing set after the bell.

--

"The scientist describes what is; The engineer creates what never was." - Theodore von Karman
Re:KDE Clipboard by Dr.Dubious+DDQ · 2002-02-13 11:30 · Score: 2

Synchronise clipboard on highlight? That's a bit obscure.
Bear in mind I'm quoting this option from memory, so the exact phrase may be a little different. You're right, though, the phrase they used was slightly cryptic, though since it's exactly what I was looking for, I recognized it when I saw it...
Why not "Copy text to clipboard when highlighted"?
Good question...except maybe that didn't sound as 'cool' as "synchronise" :-). Perhaps this (the text of the option) would make a good patch for some non-programmer who wants to help to submit...

--
Hacker Public Radio is our Friend
Re:KDE Clipboard by spitzak · 2002-02-14 07:33 · Score: 2

Another thing driving me mad is that I can't select more keyboard key-bindings for *the same* action, for example to have Ctrl+V
and SHIFT+INS assigned to "Paste" operation. You know, those years on Winsuck wannabe-operating-system did their damage
on my personality.

If this is true, this is a disease that has been on Unix UI design since the first days. The problem is programming that says "what key does this?" rather than "what does this key do?". The main result is that only one key can do each action. Ever wonder why the terminal can't take *both* backspace and delete as erase? This stupidity has been around forever (it is also in lots of Windows programs that are configurable as well...)

However I am under the impression that KDE was pretty much fixed in it's key assignments, like Windows, and they have certainly copied Windows slavishly, so I am suprised if this is not working (it works on my Qt programs). If KDE 3.0 has botched it in some misguided attempt to allow the users to "configure" the key bindings, well, that is their mistake, and a bad one at that.
Re:KDE Clipboard by lkaos · 2002-02-14 09:59 · Score: 1

(1) You said you hope it was 'fixed' infering that it was a bug. If you wish for an additional feature, you would say you hoped it was 'added.' If you feel it should be changed, then you would say 'changed.'

(2) In the time it takes to move to that silly mouse, you could have been done copying it. Copying five words is as simple as:

C-[space] ; C-u 5 M-f ; C-xrk

Five words, cut into the clipboard. Best part is that you could easily bind the above to a single key so that any time you wanted to copy 5 words from the middle of a sentence, it only required a single key. Or you could just use a macro if you needed it temporarily.

You will be faster _without_ a mouse. I promise :)

--
int func(int a);
func((b += 3, b));

No tabbed browsing? by crivens · 2002-02-13 08:50 · Score: 2, Interesting

Shame there's no tabbed browsing in Konqueror. Also I was quite surprised at the number of changes listed for console! That made me chuckle; it's like saying this is the program that most people use so it's the most important. :P

As a side note, how much obsolete and legacy code is in KDE right now? I mean, Windows contains lots of legacy code for DOS support. Any thoughts?

Re:No tabbed browsing? by Rooktoven · 2002-02-13 09:28 · Score: 2, Informative

Tabbed browsing is set to be included in 3.1. And Konsole changes are important to me. I was thrilled to see the additions.

--

Acquiescence leads to obliteration
Re:No tabbed browsing? by stilborne · 2002-02-13 09:41 · Score: 1

there is very little obsolete legacy code in KDE3. that was one of the big pushes for 3.0: to remove/improve all the items that couldn't be touched during KDE2 due to the requirement of keeping binary compatibility.
Re:No tabbed browsing? by Rob+Kaper · 2002-02-14 01:12 · Score: 2

There is hardly any legacy code. Well, maybe support for .kdelnk files but that's about it. kconf_update automatically updates your config files when they are first loaded (if necessary).

You can still run old applications if you keep your old kdelibs intact, which is the charm of version numbering of libraries under UNIX. :)

FONTS!!!! by nege · 2002-02-13 08:55 · Score: 1

Does anyone agree that the fonts in general in linux, and in KDE as well are pretty bad? Sometimes when they are smaller than 12point they are rendered almost illegibly. Mostly I am talking about the browser rendering fonts. I have tried Konquerer, Mozilla 0.97 and netscape 6.2, and the story is the same: fonts look terrible. Is there a workaround for this? Anyone using the beta notice an improvement?? Thanks!

Re:FONTS!!!! by alanwj · 2002-02-13 09:11 · Score: 3, Informative

Try the Font Deuglification HOWTO.

You might find a more recent copy on linuxdoc.org, but they seem to be down at the moment.

Alan
Re:FONTS!!!! by nnd · 2002-02-13 09:58 · Score: 1

My fonts in konq look great, without any tinkering. Netscapes on the other hand can be pretty bad, especially with it using way too small fonts.

Re:Karma Suicide!! by Sj0 · 2002-02-13 09:01 · Score: 1, Flamebait

because as we all know....

imagine a beowolf cluster of hot grits since BSD is dying!

Now *that* is how you commit karma suicide!
That's also how to get flamed out of existance by small-minded idiots!

--
It's been a long time.

Re:KDE Kmail?? by stilborne · 2002-02-13 09:04 · Score: 1

check out the agypten project, they are busy finishing up ldap support (among other things) for kmail. the merge between their devel branch and the main kmail devel branch is scehduled to occur between the 3.0 and 3.1 releases of KDE.

Re:The Usual... by davidsmind · 2002-02-13 09:06 · Score: 1, Interesting

Well actually I was quite impressed with the civility of most the people so far. The Gnome people compliment the KDE team for being speedy and, KDE people stay on topic, and the E,WM, ICEWM, Black Box and other people have kept real quiet. Now this is the way slashdot should be.

On an more OT note, I can't wait until they release 3.0Final, I am sure It will be more stable then some past stable Linux kernels *COUGH*2.4.15*COUGH*

--
I'll Sig you!

Aw heck by jhughes · 2002-02-13 09:10 · Score: 1, Funny

I just checked my KDE 2.2 download, half way done. Hit refresh on my browser and I see "KDE 3.0 out".

Man, talk about timing...

Screenshots anybody? by johanneswilm · 2002-02-13 09:23 · Score: 1

Does anybody have screenshots??? Not just the ones of the kde3alpha1 from the kde.org-website, but REALLY new ones?

Re:Ugly. by Mac · 2002-02-13 09:24 · Score: 1

If you want people to make the comparison and agree with you, it would help if you provided a URL of screenshots of Gnome 1.4+.

After trying to find them on my own and finding http://www.gnome.org/seegnome.html, I'm of the opinion that KDE 3.0 looks way better. I always find the Gnome icons and color schemes so melancholy, gray, and lifeless. But then, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If these are outdated shots, please provide a better URL; if Gnome looks better than this, I definitely want to know about it.

(disclaimer: I don't use KDE or GNOME, so couldn't care less which one is more l33t; to me they're just bloatware)

mouse gestures in konqueror by nnd · 2002-02-13 09:28 · Score: 1

anyone know if kde3.0 is going to support mouse gestures, specifically in konqueror? konqueror is my favorite browser by far, and mouse gestures is something i would love. i know its possible in the current version to add mouse gestures using kgestures, but it doesn't work so great.

No packages for redhat? unbeliveable by HanzoSan · 2002-02-13 09:28 · Score: 1, Redundant

Slackware, Mandrake, Suse, but no package for redhat?

--
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac

Re:No packages for redhat? unbeliveable by Johnny+O · 2002-02-13 09:39 · Score: 1

I am SO happy they have Slack packages!
Red Who? :-)

Learn C++ by HanzoSan · 2002-02-13 09:31 · Score: 2

I see theres no programmers here

Better programs is why you should use 3.0

--
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac

Re:Too little too late by Rooktoven · 2002-02-13 09:33 · Score: 1

Cleaned up how? Go away.

--

Acquiescence leads to obliteration

Screenshot by Isle · 2002-02-13 09:39 · Score: 5, Informative

Since noone else has.
Here is the secret link to the new
KDE 3.0 Beta2 screenshots

Re:Screenshot by Rob+Kaper · 2002-02-13 21:08 · Score: 3, Funny

I originally wanted to update them a bit before linking and announcing them. The link is no longer secret, it is now linked from the main screenshots page.

Damn, it's harder to keep a secret in KDE CVS / Dot / Slashdot than in a high school full of giggling Olsen twins.

Re:Ugly. by I_redwolf · 2002-02-13 09:41 · Score: 1

I dunno, those kde3.x shots compared to my desktop shot .. I'd go with mine.. However I'm biased :)

My ONE complaint... by Dr.Dubious+DDQ · 2002-02-13 09:50 · Score: 2

I'm downloading and compiling the beta as I type this...

I've been playing with CVS snapshots off and on recently, and I must say they're looking promising. The appearance is similar to 2.2, but with a bit more 'beautification' and eye-candy effects available, and certainly, Javascript support is MUCH improved (though I still haven't been able to view things on Atomfilms for some time in Konqueror...). The ONE complaint I have that keeps driving me back to 2.2 is the apparently broken focus handling in KDE3...

I haven't been able to tab between fields in a form, for example, though this isn't a BIG problem. The BIG problem is that while entering text in textareas (such as this form right here on slashdot), hitting 'enter' to drop to a new line will frequently...do something. Not actually submit the form, but the page seems to re(?)load. The back button brings the form back up, sans all the text that was entered in these cases. I haven't been able to figure out EXACTLY what it's doing yet.

This is the only problem I've run into, but I spend enough time on web forums that it kills me...anybody already tried the beta out know whether or not this has been fixed yet? I DO recall reading that the focus problem, in general, was due to be fixed before the final release...

--
Hacker Public Radio is our Friend

Zoom! by drsir · 2002-02-13 10:17 · Score: 1

Perhaps I over looked it, but I did not see speed as one of the improvements.

Re:Zoom! by yaba · 2002-02-14 02:08 · Score: 1

Uum, you are sure, that you are in the correct thread? Steady speed improvements are done my Microsoft (well, at least their marketing wants us to believe, that Windows XP has become faster than DOS on a 386 box).

Re:Ugly. by Skeezix · 2002-02-13 10:24 · Score: 2

I agree those shots aren't that great. Most of them are fairly old and don't really show off GNOME all that well. Here's a couple of my desktop if you're interested :)

shot 1
shot 2
shot 3
shot 4

--
Celebrate the finer things in life

Re:KDE Kmail?? by hyperstation · 2002-02-13 10:40 · Score: 1

i've been using kmail for months with no problems at all. could you elaborate on why kmail doesn't "support itself", please?

Re:KDE - Beta is stable by HeUnique · 2002-02-13 10:46 · Score: 2

Open a Linux/Unix book and learn - libraries can be installed alongside quite nicely...

You can have KDE-1, KDE 2.X & KDE 3.x - all on the same machine, all of them running on the same X without a single problem...

Try the same thing with Windows 9x - they "fixed" this problem on XP if I'm not mistaken..

--
Hetz (Heunique)

for those who aren't 1337 h40rs... by evilpaul13 · 2002-02-13 10:48 · Score: 1

Just check out the screenshots!

Sorry, it is not bull. by sombragris · 2002-02-13 11:08 · Score: 1

I think this is *not* bullshit. Bero does what he can, but for a big example of RH's attitude problem towards can be seen in this bug report, which renders all non-us keyboard layouts unusable in KDE. The bug was present in the initial RH 7.2 release and it is still open, even after the upgrade to qt-2.3.2.

It is very difficult to think that RH does not hate KDE when a simple but annoying bug that renders all your accents and diacriticals unusable is left out in the cold without any hope of fixing.

--
-- Look to the Rose that blows about us--"Lo, Laughing," she says, "into the World I blow..."

Re:Sorry, it is not bull. by bero-rh · 2002-02-13 11:27 · Score: 2

The problem is that the xim patch is vital for people who need Japanese in KDE, so simply removing it is replacing one problem with another (arguably bigger) one, which isn't an option.

It's fixed for real in the current tree (qt3/kde3), the fix can't be backported easily, and I don't have more than 24 hours a day, so this simply has to wait until I have a lot of spare time (getting this right isn't exactly easy for someone like myself who doesn't have the slightest clue about Japanese input methods), or until someone else attaches a patch that fixes both.

--
This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html

Hypocrisy by some+guy+I+know · 2002-02-13 11:11 · Score: 1

While I don't necessarily disagree with your implication of hypocrisy, I must point out that there is a significant difference between having to buy a new version of an app (MS, usually) and just having to recompile or download a new version of an app (GNU/Linux, usually).

--
Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana

Re:trolltech's QT by bero-rh · 2002-02-13 11:32 · Score: 2

qt, well, just sucks.

On the contrary. KDE wouldn't be anywhere near where it is now if it were using anything else.

The default look of Qt may be boring in some people's tastes, but its programming interface beats all other toolkits out there by far.

Try it for yourself: Read the tutorials for, say, Qt, GTK, Motif and Win32. Then implement a simple application in each of them. You'll almost certainly notice you can do it much quicker with Qt.

And Qt 3.0 adds the possibility to load styles as plugins, so you can change the look much better than earlier.

--
This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html

This is laughable. by sombragris · 2002-02-13 12:31 · Score: 1

bero: what about people who need German, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Hungarian and the like in KDE?? Why don't you put a qt-ja package for Japanese users and the normal and functional qt for the rest of the civilized world???

I really admire you and your efforts. You are singlehandedly pushing KDE in Red Hat (and making a sizable contribution to RH's bottom line since many people use RH with KDE) but your loneliness in supporting KDE speaks volumes about RH's attitude, not to mention issues such as this, which relinquishes all European languages other than English in favor of Japanese. This is plain foolishness.

--
-- Look to the Rose that blows about us--"Lo, Laughing," she says, "into the World I blow..."

Re:This is laughable. by bero-rh · 2002-02-13 22:29 · Score: 2

It's not THAT bad.
I regularily use German characters (if only to get the weird ä character in my last name right), and it works.
The problem is just using deadkeys, which isn't that widely used,
and AFAIK can easily be worked around using Compose
(e.g. Try pressing Alt Gr+Shift, then ,c to get the
French c character, or Alt Gr+Shift, then "a to get ä).

--
This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html

Re:trolltech's QT by gol64738 · 2002-02-13 13:11 · Score: 1

i've done a lot of work with glade (GTK) and python, but have zero experience with Qt.
maybe i just don't like the widgets or something...

anyways, when kde3 is final, i will download and check out for sure.

Re:KDE - Beta is stable by York+the+Mysterious · 2002-02-13 14:43 · Score: 1

Actually for the most part MS keeps compatibility. That's what compatibility mode is for. It might be a shitty way to do it, but it works. I'm tired of hearing that arguement over and over again. It doesn't work. Stick with stuff that works. Security holes. That works.

--

Tim Smith - Ramblings from Nerd Land

OT: your sig by Z4rd0Z · 2002-02-13 15:22 · Score: 2

About your sig, did that come from the song "Totally Wired" by the Fall?

--
You had me at "dicks fuck assholes".

KDE 3.1 Preview by Rob+Kaper · 2002-02-13 18:51 · Score: 2

Huh? Well, there is a list of planned features already. Mostly stuff that didn't make KDE 3.0 or wasn't done yet because 3.0 is the only opportunity to make binary incompatible changes for a long while again. So the development focus for 3.0 has very much been the underlying framework, while 3.1 will add some more features and eye-candy, probably.

Please note that some of the planned items still might not make it and that it is very likely that several items are not yet planned but will pop up in time for the 3.1 freeze which is several months away.

Re:KDE - Beta is stable by fredrik70 · 2002-02-13 22:45 · Score: 2, Interesting

You can't compare with dos - it's a completely different OS (well, program launcher) than win2k, heck even win9x and winNT/win2k are completely different OSes. Linux has always been Linux.
an ancient dos tool *might* wont run on win2000 but that's usually because it's hitting the metal - which I find is a *very* good reasong for win2k not to let it run. dos runs on old 8088/8086 CPU's, Linux wont run on anything less than a 386.

True though you can run old KDE apps with th eold libs - mind you aint that fussed about upgrading - since all apps I got are free anyway it wont cost me a penny, plus it gives me a good excuse to sit down and tinker with my boxen!

--
if (!signature) { throw std::runtime_error("No sig!"); }

Re:KDE - Beta is stable by Metrol · 2002-02-13 23:24 · Score: 2

Why didnt they make KDE3 backward compatible with KDE2?

As I recall from earlier stories (PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong here, it's been a while) the KDE folks were looking at binary incompatibility no matter what due to a new gcc that was due out. I don't pretend to understand the mechanics, but apparently everything was going to require a recompile anyway.

Probably mentioned in some mailing list archive someplace. They figgered that if ever there was a good time to break compatibility, now was that time. The long term game plan is to have the underlying architecture of KDE 3.0 support new versions for the next 3 years or so.

I've seen it mentioned a number of times exactly how aware the KDE crew is to this breakage. Heck, there's still KDE 1.2 apps that haven't been bumped up yet! Hopefully, this will be the last of these kinds of upgrades for a while... assuming the game plan works out that is. 3 years is a darn long time for KDE.

--
The line must be drawn here. This far. No further.

No by wiredog · 2002-02-14 00:52 · Score: 2

From Hunter S. Thompson, author of "Fear and Loathing..." I'm not sure which of his writings it's from.

--

Best Slashdot Co

Are the fonts fixed? by moonchuck · 2002-02-14 07:02 · Score: 1

Sometimes the fonts at boot would change to unreadable size then after rebooting a few times they'd go to huge size or back to normal 10pt.

Also Konsole , I hate it, I've changed the default to xterm in the control panel. It took me some time to figure how to cut n paste without a 3-button mouse : you select the text, then to paste it's shift-insert. I still can't paste to another program like an editor, anyone knows how?

Focus still broken, dagnabbit... by Dr.Dubious+DDQ · 2002-02-14 07:21 · Score: 2

To answer my own question a few posts down - the focus handling in KDE3 is still broken as of this release...

This is the one quirk left that, for me, ruins usability of KDE3 (though thankfully it IS slated to be fixed before release).

The problem is, evidently, the fact that when you select something it's not necessarily what has 'focus' - if you click on a textarea field and start typing, what really has 'focus' is the first link on the page. Hit 'enter' in the textarea and Konqueror loads whatever is on that first link...

Double-clicking URL's in Konqueror's location toolbar and hitting 'delete' to clear out the bar no longer works either, which I assume is related to the focus bugs.

Looking forward to the final release, though - all in all, KDE3 is VERY nice. Spiffier looking, and konqueror works even better...

--
Hacker Public Radio is our Friend

Re:This is even more laughable. by sombragris · 2002-02-15 12:19 · Score: 1

Bero, have you tried to use that solution in an US-Intl? Have you documented the appropriate workaround, (if any, because there aren't any for my layout)?

The fact remains: Red Hat is denying its users the capability of writing their own languages.

--
-- Look to the Rose that blows about us--"Lo, Laughing," she says, "into the World I blow..."

KDE on Tru64 by timecop · 2002-02-15 16:51 · Score: 1, Insightful

> and Tru-64 binary packages are available now

I run KDE2 on Tru64 and it absolutely owns

Windows sucks compared to this!

192 of 316 comments (clear)