7:20 a.m.
There was some talk a few months back about trimming down the
screensavers in Fedora Core to a more sane number.
First, there was the issue of 3D screensavers bogging down machines that
couldn't handle them:
https://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-desktop-list/2003-December/msg...
Then, I floated a proposal to pare down the included screensavers:
https://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-desktop-list/2004-February/msg...
Then, Bill Nottingham had my favourite proposal yet for the
screensavers:
https://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-desktop-list/2004-February/msg...
Bill Nottingham <notting redhat com> wrote:
xscreensaver - blank only, core
xscreensaver-extras - everything else
Simple, clean, avoids flamewars.
Has there been any progress on this? Is it too late to do something for FC3?
Thanks,
Steven Garrity
8:23 a.m.
On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 09:20 -0300, Steven Garrity wrote:
There was some talk a few months back about trimming down the
screensavers in Fedora Core to a more sane number.
>
> xscreensaver - blank only, core
> xscreensaver-extras - everything else
>
> Simple, clean, avoids flamewars.
>
Has there been any progress on this? Is it too late to do something for FC3?
If there aren't any objections, I don't have a problem doing that.
--Ray Strode
9:57 a.m.
> >
> > Simple, clean, avoids flamewars.
> >
That's a nice way to handle it, but it's only really aimed at the geek
population. 'Bootstrapping GCC' isn't something many normal users do.
I like the idea of including a few 'pretty' screensavers the user can
choose to run from the control panel if they feel the urge to customise
- otherwise people can become disalusioned, and people will happily
judge their first Linux experience by the quality of given screensavers.
A lot of the Xscreensavers need to be taken to the pasture and shot,
they are /so/ 1983
Ed
9:52 a.m.
Ed Mack wrote:
>> >
>> > Simple, clean, avoids flamewars.
>> >
That's a nice way to handle it, but it's only really aimed at the geek
population. 'Bootstrapping GCC' isn't something many normal users do.
I like the idea of including a few 'pretty' screensavers the user can
choose to run from the control panel if they feel the urge to customise
- otherwise people can become disalusioned, and people will happily
judge their first Linux experience by the quality of given screensavers.
A lot of the Xscreensavers need to be taken to the pasture and shot,
they are /so/ 1983
I agree that a few simple/quality screensavers would be fine to include
by default, but if the debate over which should stay will at all delay
the removal of all the cruft, I'd say we go to blank-only.
I think blank-only is a better default for now, and we can work on
getting a couple (probably just one good simple Fedora logo screensaver)
back in later on.
Steven Garrity
10:57 p.m.
On Tuesday 13 July 2004 09:52 am, Steven Garrity wrote:
I agree that a few simple/quality screensavers would be fine to
include
by default, but if the debate over which should stay will at all delay
the removal of all the cruft, I'd say we go to blank-only.
Why not do a default screen savor that provides information such as clickable
links to the Fedora Core mail lists, on line RH-EL3 manuals or Fedora Docs,
useful info for newbies and geeks alike.
Tweeks
1:45 a.m.
On Mon, 2004-07-19 at 05:57, Tom Weeks wrote:
On Tuesday 13 July 2004 09:52 am, Steven Garrity wrote:
> I agree that a few simple/quality screensavers would be fine to include
> by default, but if the debate over which should stay will at all delay
> the removal of all the cruft, I'd say we go to blank-only.
Why not do a default screen savor that provides information such as clickable
links to the Fedora Core mail lists, on line RH-EL3 manuals or Fedora Docs,
useful info for newbies and geeks alike.
That kind of subverts the idea of a screensaver that kicks in
automatically after a period of inactivity and vanished as soon as the
user does something, e.g. move the mouse ;-).
I thunk the info you mention would be more suited to be put into the
default home page (file:///usr/share/doc/HTML/index.html). Feel free to
put an RFE into bugzilla.
Nils
--
Nils Philippsen / Red Hat / nphilipp(a)redhat.com
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- B. Franklin, 1759
PGP fingerprint: C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F 656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011
11:38 a.m.
On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 08:45:49 +0200, Nils Philippsen wrote:
That kind of subverts the idea of a screensaver that kicks in
automatically after a period of inactivity and vanished as soon as the
user does something, e.g. move the mouse ;-).
However, a screensaver that gave random tips, fortune cookies, helpful
advice, alerted you if there were pending security updates etc *would* be
very cool :)
12:31 p.m.
On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 17:38:11 +0100, Mike Hearn <mike(a)navi.cx> wrote:
However, a screensaver that gave random tips, fortune cookies,
helpful
advice, alerted you if there were pending security updates etc *would* be
very cool :)
Not as a default. I cringe at the thought of computers that by default broadcast
a message like "Hey moron! You need to totally update me with security updates"
while sitting.. idling...with the operator away from the display..just
waiting for someone to walk by and to note that the computer the
display is attached to is in a vulnerable state. Information leakage
isn't really a good idea. I don't even want to see the Operating
system version being display if at all possible, certainly not uptime
or kernel version or whether the machine is security patched in a
screensaver.
-jef
10:17 a.m.
Ed Mack wrote:
>> >
>> > Simple, clean, avoids flamewars.
>> >
That's a nice way to handle it, but it's only really aimed at the geek
population. 'Bootstrapping GCC' isn't something many normal users do.
I like the idea of including a few 'pretty' screensavers the user can
choose to run from the control panel if they feel the urge to customise
- otherwise people can become disalusioned, and people will happily
judge their first Linux experience by the quality of given screensavers.
A lot of the Xscreensavers need to be taken to the pasture and shot,
they are /so/ 1983
Ed
True, bootstrapping GCC is not a typical user activity. However, paying
electricity bills is pretty common. Given that many people now have a
couple computers at home, the money saved by not driving the monitors
24/7 would be attractive.
Most of the preinstalled version of Windows I have seen now put the
screen in power saving mode as the default.
Keeping some attractive screen savers in there is fine. I just like the
default preferences to be something that is more useful. I would imagine
a large portion of the users don't care about the screen savers, and
setting to default to something that would save them money would be a
good thing.
-Will
-Will
1:29 p.m.
True, bootstrapping GCC is not a typical user activity. However,
paying
electricity bills is pretty common. Given that many people now have a
couple computers at home, the money saved by not driving the monitors
24/7 would be attractive.
The way I run my computers is about 10 mins of screen-savers (Just for
view, and also to remind me to get back to it :)) and then power saving
blank. Does me great.
For some nice screensavers, I say get the (assuming liscencing is ok)
'Really Slick X Screensavers' pack. It's very MacOSX-ish and pleasent to
watch (All openGL).
http://rss-glx.sourceforge.net/
For simplistic, keep the simple text one, and XRaySwarm and
AntSpotlight. They are pretty and Screen-saverish (not just hackish :)
Ed
8:56 a.m.
I vote for turning just blanking the screen and turning on "Display
Power Management" on video/monitor combinations that support it.
Blanking the screen will save the screen much more that any of the
screen savers. If people want to run screen savers for eye candy, fine.
However, for most situations it seems like the screen savers are just a
waste. Who is looking at the screen when they are sleeping? Also who
wants the screen saver to kick in and use the CPU when they are doing a
large build, e.g. GCC bootstrap?
I find myself always setting screen saver preferences for blanking the
screen and "Display Power management". There are financial incentives
for using the power management:
http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=power_mgt.pr_pm_home_office
-Will
Steven Garrity wrote:
There was some talk a few months back about trimming down the
screensavers in Fedora Core to a more sane number.
First, there was the issue of 3D screensavers bogging down machines that
couldn't handle them:
https://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-desktop-list/2003-December/msg...
Then, I floated a proposal to pare down the included screensavers:
https://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-desktop-list/2004-February/msg...
Then, Bill Nottingham had my favourite proposal yet for the
screensavers:
https://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-desktop-list/2004-February/msg...
Bill Nottingham <notting redhat com> wrote:
>
> xscreensaver - blank only, core
> xscreensaver-extras - everything else
>
> Simple, clean, avoids flamewars.
>
Has there been any progress on this? Is it too late to do something for
FC3?
Thanks,
Steven Garrity
10:56 a.m.
On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 14:20, Steven Garrity wrote:
There was some talk a few months back about trimming down the
screensavers in Fedora Core to a more sane number.
First, there was the issue of 3D screensavers bogging down machines that
couldn't handle them:
https://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-desktop-list/2003-December/msg...
Then, I floated a proposal to pare down the included screensavers:
https://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-desktop-list/2004-February/msg...
Then, Bill Nottingham had my favourite proposal yet for the
screensavers:
https://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-desktop-list/2004-February/msg...
Bill Nottingham <notting redhat com> wrote:
>
> xscreensaver - blank only, core
> xscreensaver-extras - everything else
>
> Simple, clean, avoids flamewars.
>
Has there been any progress on this? Is it too late to do something for FC3?
From my POV this whole issue is 80% rather trivial (packaging) with 20%
coding that needs to be done before that can be the case:
- xscreensaver needs to revert to "blank screen" if the user has chosen
anything other than {disable screen saver, blank screen}, likewise
xscreensaver-demo (which should rather be xscreensaver-config,
...-prefs, ...) should only let you enable or disable blanking in that
case
- xscreensaver needs another means than X11 resources to let the
preferences tool know about the installed hacks, messing around with
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/app-defaults/XScreenSaver is very cumbersome and
bug-prone. Something like a directory /etc/xscreensaver/hacks.d where
packages could just drop in small files describing their hacks would be
best IMO
Both of these are not that trivial and would need to be accepted
upstream down the road -- we don't want to maintain such patches forever
Nils
--
Nils Philippsen / Red Hat / nphilipp(a)redhat.com
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- B. Franklin, 1759
PGP fingerprint: C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F 656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011
2:03 p.m.
A blank screen is more than enough to suffice for me, in fact I wouldn't
want anything else. However, when I dropped off a computer I built for
my Aunt, she was overly happy when she discovered she could have her
screensaver cycle through some pictures she had. Simple stuff can make
all the difference to new users.
Trimming down the screensavers is only the start, other work needs to be
done like better screensavers. The biggest issue for me, is that I can
be watching a DVD in my fedora installation and then the screensaver
kicks in! The only way to stop it is to disable my screensaver, and
re-enable it when i'm done. For a user, that would be unnacceptable, and
is certaintly annoying me to the point I just reboot if I'm going to
watch a movie or tv show.
2:14 p.m.
On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 15:03 -0400, Chris Farber wrote:
Trimming down the screensavers is only the start, other work needs to
be
done like better screensavers. The biggest issue for me, is that I can
be watching a DVD in my fedora installation and then the screensaver
kicks in! The only way to stop it is to disable my screensaver, and
re-enable it when i'm done.
Try a better DVD player. :-) Totem automagically tells xscreensaver not
to blank when it's playing in fullscreen.
- jck
--
"We act as though comfort and luxury were the chief requirements of
life, when all that we need to make us happy is something to be
enthusiastic about."
-- Albert Einstein
2:26 p.m.
thanks :)
jck wrote:
On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 15:03 -0400, Chris Farber wrote:
>Trimming down the screensavers is only the start, other work needs to be
>done like better screensavers. The biggest issue for me, is that I can
>be watching a DVD in my fedora installation and then the screensaver
>kicks in! The only way to stop it is to disable my screensaver, and
>re-enable it when i'm done.
>
>
Try a better DVD player. :-) Totem automagically tells xscreensaver not
to blank when it's playing in fullscreen.
- jck
2:44 p.m.
Chris Farber (ephex(a)earthlink.net) said:
Trimming down the screensavers is only the start, other work needs to
be
done like better screensavers. The biggest issue for me, is that I can
be watching a DVD in my fedora installation and then the screensaver
kicks in! The only way to stop it is to disable my screensaver, and
re-enable it when i'm done. For a user, that would be unnacceptable, and
is certaintly annoying me to the point I just reboot if I'm going to
watch a movie or tv show.
Your DVD player is broken, it should do that for you. ;)
Bill
2:58 p.m.
Trim down the screen savers make Fedora 3 dull, drab, not fun...
Hell that will pull the end user away from Windows! After all Linux is
an OS for work not for fun anyway. Maybe if we made it as ugly as
Windows 95 people would flock to it in droves?
While we are trimming things down take out the desktop backgrounds as
well!
Tony Grant
--
www.tgds.net Library management software toolkit
3:27 p.m.
Trim down the scre <trim big stupid rant> er all Linux is
Have you looked at the majority of X screen savers with FC2? They are
called 'hacks' by the program for a reason - most of them are cheap and
ugly. Most look much more dated than Windows 95. It's trimming them that
makes it more up to date and clean.
The wallpapers are great, btw.
Ed
7:39 p.m.
On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 08:20, Steven Garrity wrote:
Bill Nottingham <notting redhat com> wrote:
>
> xscreensaver - blank only, core
> xscreensaver-extras - everything else
>
> Simple, clean, avoids flamewars.
>
Has there been any progress on this? Is it too late to do something for FC3?
Regular desktop-using people like screensavers. Trimming them down good,
making it blank/powersave after a while by default good, deleting them
all kind of lame.
A simple default saver could cycle through the desktop backgrounds, and
let people specify a directory of images to cycle through instead.
Then have a couple of simple pretty savers in the spirit of the gdm
theme and default background, perhaps.
Havoc
10:08 p.m.
this makes sense to me.. although i would leave a couple of basic ones
in core, and split up the rest into two packages, ones that run
without 3d accel. and those that need it.
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 09:20:50 -0300, Steven Garrity
<stevelist(a)silverorange.com> wrote:
Then, Bill Nottingham had my favourite proposal yet for the
screensavers:
https://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-desktop-list/2004-February/msg...
Bill Nottingham <notting redhat com> wrote:
>
> xscreensaver - blank only, core
> xscreensaver-extras - everything else
>
> Simple, clean, avoids flamewars.
>
Has there been any progress on this? Is it too late to do something for FC3?
11:19 p.m.
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, psychoelmo wrote:
this makes sense to me.. although i would leave a couple of basic
ones
in core, and split up the rest into two packages, ones that run
without 3d accel. and those that need it.
All of the OpenGL screensavers work with Mesa software OpenGL,
albeit some of them are quite slow, but none of them have a hard
requirement of 3D acceleration.
It does make sense to me for them to be in a
xscreensaver-3D-savers package or something perhaps.
12:57 p.m.
Mike A. Harris wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, psychoelmo wrote:
>this makes sense to me.. although i would leave a couple of basic ones
>in core, and split up the rest into two packages, ones that run
>without 3d accel. and those that need it.
>
>
All of the OpenGL screensavers work with Mesa software OpenGL,
albeit some of them are quite slow, but none of them have a hard
requirement of 3D acceleration.
That's like listening to a CD that skips, or a download that goes at two
bytes per second.
It does make sense to me for them to be in a
xscreensaver-3D-savers package or something perhaps.
Yes, it does.
1:01 p.m.
Mike A. Harris (mharris(a)www.linux.org.uk) said:
All of the OpenGL screensavers work with Mesa software OpenGL,
albeit some of them are quite slow, but none of them have a hard
requirement of 3D acceleration.
Well, gflux is rather... unpleasant to run on a SW-GL only box.
But it's not in the default config.
Bill
1:43 p.m.
Bill Nottingham (notting(a)redhat.com) said:
Mike A. Harris (mharris(a)www.linux.org.uk) said:
> All of the OpenGL screensavers work with Mesa software OpenGL,
> albeit some of them are quite slow, but none of them have a hard
> requirement of 3D acceleration.
Well, gflux is rather... unpleasant to run on a SW-GL only box.
But it's not in the default config.
Erm, glblur. :)
Bill
7:27 p.m.
So, as this thread illustrates, there are plenty of opinions on the
screensavers.
Perhaps someone with the authority/ability can make a call on this based
on the various options floated on this thread and go ahead with it.
There seems, at least, to be consensus that there are too many old/ugly
screensavers in there now.
Steven Garrity
7:33 p.m.
On Wed, 2004-07-14 at 21:27 -0300, Steven Garrity wrote:
So, as this thread illustrates, there are plenty of opinions on the
screensavers.
Perhaps someone with the authority/ability can make a call on this based
on the various options floated on this thread and go ahead with it.
So what I'm
going to end up doing is making the base xscreensaver
package have a small number of screensavers, and then have an additional
package for the more fancy ones.
--Ray Strode
9:20 p.m.
Ray Strode wrote:
On Wed, 2004-07-14 at 21:27 -0300, Steven Garrity wrote:
>So, as this thread illustrates, there are plenty of opinions on the
>screensavers.
>
>Perhaps someone with the authority/ability can make a call on this based
>on the various options floated on this thread and go ahead with it.
>
>
So what I'm going to end up doing is making the base xscreensaver
package have a small number of screensavers, and then have an additional
package for the more fancy ones.
How about a four way split (feel free to come up with better names)?
screensavers-base
screensavers-3d
screensavers-pretty (all judged to be better than the ones in misc)
screensavers-misc (all of the ones you'd love to leave out completely)
Now let's nominate some screensavers that are not resource intensive
(ie, not 3d and don't take up more than say 25% CPU on a computer 3-4
years old) and pleasing to the eye to make a list totaling 10 or less.
I can think of some now, but can't think of their name right now.
So, what say you?
10:25 p.m.
I like this idea.
I'm not sure if a screensaver like this exists - but how about including
a slideshow screensaver, one that cycles through images in a directory
with some nice transitional effects [don't ask me to program this though
hehe]. Since this probably won't eat much cpu at all, it would make a
very nice choice for the screensavers-base package.
On Wed, 2004-07-14 at 22:20, Mike Fedyk wrote:
Ray Strode wrote:
>On Wed, 2004-07-14 at 21:27 -0300, Steven Garrity wrote:
>
>
>>So, as this thread illustrates, there are plenty of opinions on the
>>screensavers.
>>
>>Perhaps someone with the authority/ability can make a call on this based
>>on the various options floated on this thread and go ahead with it.
>>
>>
>So what I'm going to end up doing is making the base xscreensaver
>package have a small number of screensavers, and then have an additional
>package for the more fancy ones.
>
How about a four way split (feel free to come up with better names)?
screensavers-base
screensavers-3d
screensavers-pretty (all judged to be better than the ones in misc)
screensavers-misc (all of the ones you'd love to leave out completely)
Now let's nominate some screensavers that are not resource intensive
(ie, not 3d and don't take up more than say 25% CPU on a computer 3-4
years old) and pleasing to the eye to make a list totaling 10 or less.
I can think of some now, but can't think of their name right now.
So, what say you?
10:45 p.m.
Chris Farber wrote:
I like this idea.
I'm not sure if a screensaver like this exists - but how about including
The idea is to choose between existing screen savers already in the package.
So please reply with a list of existing savers already in the package,
and we can go from there...
2:12 p.m.
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 11:25:19PM -0400, Chris Farber wrote:
I like this idea.
I'm not sure if a screensaver like this exists - but how about including
a slideshow screensaver, one that cycles through images in a directory
with some nice transitional effects [don't ask me to program this though
hehe]. Since this probably won't eat much cpu at all, it would make a
very nice choice for the screensavers-base package.
There are many screensavers now that do that stuff. It's a xscreensaver
option, to pick images from a directory, the desktop, or video frames.
Fedora default could be changed from the desktop to random images from a
directory.
Regards,
Luciano Rocha
2:21 p.m.
On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 08:12:22PM +0100, Luciano Miguel Ferreira Rocha wrote:
Fedora default could be changed from the desktop to random images
from a
directory.
And should be -- it's annoying to lock your screen, only to find
later that your desktop is exposed anyway.
--
Matthew Miller mattdm(a)mattdm.org <http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/>
11:01 p.m.
I've been trying to hack up a basic logo display/slideshow screensaver,
but it's quite difficult. Would anybody with experience using
xscreensaver/screenhack.h/xlib be willing to help or take over? What
I've got so far is here: http://www.linuxgrrl.com/ss/ - a modification
to grenetic.
Here are my nominations for each category, for what it's worth:
How about a four way split (feel free to come up with better names)?
screensavers-base
1. Popsquares
2. Attraction Splines
3. Halo
4. Halftone
5. Phosphor
6. Font Glide
7. Font Glide Scroller
8. Slide screen
screensavers-3d
1. Atlantis
2. Bouncing Cow
3. Circuit
4. Endgame
5. Flying Toasters
6. Lavalite
7. queens
8. Atunnel
9. GL snake
10. GL Blur
screensavers-pretty (all judged to be better than the ones in misc)
1. metaballs
2. polytopes
3. shadebobs
4. glmatrix
5. xmatrix
6. stairs
7. Flurry
8. eruption
Also came up with two other categories looking through them:
Desktop Distortions:
1. decay screen
2. ripples (desktop)
3. rot zoomer
4. rot zoomer sweep
5. slide screen
6. spotlight
7. twang
8. zoom fatbits
9. Distort
Text:
1. phosphor
2. star wars
3. GL text
4. Font Glide
5. Font Glide Scroller
screensavers-misc (all of the ones you'd love to leave out
completely)
Now let's nominate some screensavers that are not resource intensive
(ie, not 3d and don't take up more than say 25% CPU on a computer 3-4
years old) and pleasing to the eye to make a list totaling 10 or less.
I can think of some now, but can't think of their name right now.
So, what say you?
2:51 a.m.
On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 12:01:29AM -0400, Máirín Duffy wrote:
> screensavers-3d
1. Atlantis
2. Bouncing Cow
3. Circuit
4. Endgame
5. Flying Toasters
6. Lavalite
7. queens
8. Atunnel
9. GL snake
10. GL Blur
Plus, add in the super-cool rss_glx screensavers -- having it as a
completely separate package introduces a nasty kludge....
--
Matthew Miller mattdm(a)mattdm.org <http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/>
3:25 a.m.
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 12:01:29AM -0400, Máirín Duffy wrote:
> > screensavers-3d
> 1. Atlantis
> 2. Bouncing Cow
> 3. Circuit
> 4. Endgame
> 5. Flying Toasters
> 6. Lavalite
> 7. queens
> 8. Atunnel
> 9. GL snake
> 10. GL Blur
Plus, add in the super-cool rss_glx screensavers -- having it as a
completely separate package introduces a nasty kludge....
We're trying to cut down on screensavers, not increase them. ;o)
Seriously though, Fedora Extras is the best place for something
like rss. Of course only after any legal issues that might exist
in the code can be investigated and resolved/concluded. Last I
checked there was some potential problems, and even low risks are
risks not worth taking for something as trivial as screensavers.
;)
11:10 a.m.
On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 04:25:54AM -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote:
We're trying to cut down on screensavers, not increase them. ;o)
Bah. :)
Seriously though, Fedora Extras is the best place for something
like rss. Of course only after any legal issues that might exist
The current rss package does a sick thing with sed and
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/app-defaults/XScreenSaver in its rpm postinstall scripts.
Is there a way to avoid that other than including them in the base package?
--
Matthew Miller mattdm(a)mattdm.org <http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/>
11:11 a.m.
On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 12:10:11PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
The current rss package does a sick thing with sed and
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/app-defaults/XScreenSaver in its rpm postinstall scripts.
Is there a way to avoid that other than including them in the base package?
*notices rest of thread*
(Nevermindme.)
--
Matthew Miller mattdm(a)mattdm.org <http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/>
4:11 p.m.
On Thu, 2004-07-15 at 10:25, Mike A. Harris wrote:
Seriously though, Fedora Extras is the best place for something
like rss. Of course only after any legal issues that might exist
in the code can be investigated and resolved/concluded. Last I
checked there was some potential problems, and even low risks are
risks not worth taking for something as trivial as screensavers.
;)
Sorry, but I guess I've asked that question already -- which problems
are there with rss (well, other than maybe that ugly matrixview hack
that I'd be most happy to throw out ;-)?
Nils
--
Nils Philippsen / Red Hat / nphilipp(a)redhat.com
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- B. Franklin, 1759
PGP fingerprint: C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F 656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011
4:24 a.m.
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004, [ISO-8859-1] M�ir�n Duffy wrote:
Desktop Distortions:
It looks quite reasonable to me to package these separately and
do not include them by default. They break the rule "lock and no
one will see what's on your desktop while you get your coffee".
behdad
1. decay screen
2. ripples (desktop)
3. rot zoomer
4. rot zoomer sweep
5. slide screen
6. spotlight
7. twang
8. zoom fatbits
9. Distort
--behdad
4:57 a.m.
Mike Fedyk wrote:
How about a four way split (feel free to come up with better names)?
screensavers-base
screensavers-3d
screensavers-pretty (all judged to be better than the ones in misc)
screensavers-misc (all of the ones you'd love to leave out completely)
Wouldn't it be better to create a separate OpenGL screensavers package?
Or is that the -3d package? I have a dual-head setup, one nvidia
geforce4mx and an old sis pci card. I like to run flurry, but it needs
OpenGL and unfortunately that sis card doesn't support it. So if my
system starts the screensaver one monitor has the pretty flurry visuals
and the other one prints out some errors. Having different screensavers
on each screen would probably involve changing xscreensaver?
Nils.
--
"I got a funny feeling they got plastic in the afterlife" - Beck
12:25 p.m.
Nils Breunese wrote:
Mike Fedyk wrote:
> How about a four way split (feel free to come up with better names)?
>
> screensavers-base
> screensavers-3d
> screensavers-pretty (all judged to be better than the ones in misc)
> screensavers-misc (all of the ones you'd love to leave out completely)
Wouldn't it be better to create a separate OpenGL screensavers package?
Yes.
Or is that the -3d package?
Yes
I have a dual-head setup, one nvidia geforce4mx and an old sis pci
card. I like to run flurry, but it needs OpenGL and unfortunately that
sis card doesn't support it. So if my system starts the screensaver
one monitor has the pretty flurry visuals and the other one prints out
some errors. Having different screensavers on each screen would
probably involve changing xscreensaver?
Dunno.
4:17 p.m.
On Thu, 2004-07-15 at 11:57, Nils Breunese wrote:
Wouldn't it be better to create a separate OpenGL screensavers
package?
Or is that the -3d package? I have a dual-head setup, one nvidia
geforce4mx and an old sis pci card. I like to run flurry, but it needs
OpenGL and unfortunately that sis card doesn't support it. So if my
system starts the screensaver one monitor has the pretty flurry visuals
and the other one prints out some errors. Having different screensavers
on each screen would probably involve changing xscreensaver?
Surely. XScreensaver already marks GL hacks as such so I guess it would
be doable to only call them if HW rendering for GL is available...
Nils
--
Nils Philippsen / Red Hat / nphilipp(a)redhat.com
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- B. Franklin, 1759
PGP fingerprint: C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F 656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011
2:47 a.m.
On Thu, 2004-07-15 at 02:33, Ray Strode wrote:
On Wed, 2004-07-14 at 21:27 -0300, Steven Garrity wrote:
> So, as this thread illustrates, there are plenty of opinions on the
> screensavers.
>
> Perhaps someone with the authority/ability can make a call on this based
> on the various options floated on this thread and go ahead with it.
So what I'm going to end up doing is making the base xscreensaver
package have a small number of screensavers, and then have an additional
package for the more fancy ones.
Have you already decided how to tackle the "how can xscreensaver hacks
packages be dropped in simply" problem I outlined in one of my last
posts?
I've already messed around with adding hacks to
/usr/X11R6/lib/app-defaults/XScreensaver (in the course of packaging
rss-glx for Fedora) and this is neither fun and nor reliable ;-) -- you
need to deal with any of {xscreensaver base package,random xscreensaver
extra hacks package} being {installed,removed,updated}. I'd vote very
much for some /etc/xscreensaver/hacks.d directory where extra hacks
pacvkages can simply drop their configuration.
Nils
--
Nils Philippsen / Red Hat / nphilipp(a)redhat.com
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- B. Franklin, 1759
PGP fingerprint: C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F 656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011
3:08 a.m.
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004, Nils Philippsen wrote:
On Thu, 2004-07-15 at 02:33, Ray Strode wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-07-14 at 21:27 -0300, Steven Garrity wrote:
> > So, as this thread illustrates, there are plenty of opinions on the
> > screensavers.
> >
> > Perhaps someone with the authority/ability can make a call on this based
> > on the various options floated on this thread and go ahead with it.
> So what I'm going to end up doing is making the base xscreensaver
> package have a small number of screensavers, and then have an additional
> package for the more fancy ones.
Have you already decided how to tackle the "how can xscreensaver hacks
packages be dropped in simply" problem I outlined in one of my last
posts?
I've already messed around with adding hacks to
/usr/X11R6/lib/app-defaults/XScreensaver (in the course of packaging
rss-glx for Fedora) and this is neither fun and nor reliable ;-) -- you
need to deal with any of {xscreensaver base package,random xscreensaver
extra hacks package} being {installed,removed,updated}. I'd vote very
much for some /etc/xscreensaver/hacks.d directory where extra hacks
pacvkages can simply drop their configuration.
Seconded. I've seen the rss-glx %post hack and by gawd it's not, uh,
exactly clean :)
- Panu -
3:31 a.m.
On Thu, 2004-07-15 at 09:47 +0200, Nils Philippsen wrote:
Have you already decided how to tackle the "how can xscreensaver
hacks
packages be dropped in simply" problem I outlined in one of my last
posts?
No. I haven't looked at the technical issues involved at all yet.
Your proposal may be the best way to go. I'll revisit the issue
when I've set aside time to make the required changes.
--Ray
4:25 a.m.
I can't believe screensavers are this popular to Linux users...
What a long thread :-) for *just* screensavers...
We must have a really stable distribution :) or are they just distraction from all the
bugs? :)
9:12 a.m.
On Thu, 2004-07-15 at 12:25, Harald Hoyer wrote:
I can't believe screensavers are this popular to Linux users...
What a long thread :-) for *just* screensavers...
We must have a really stable distribution :) or are they just distraction from all the
bugs? :)
Seriously many of my friends, both from computer illiterate and
Windows-camps simply drool over some of the screensavers Linux has.
Does that have *anything* to do with reality of usability? No.
But cool screensavers sure as hell makes people think "wow, linux has
that kind of stuff as *screensavers*, wonder what else can it do my
windows box doesn't" :)
- Panu -
4:14 p.m.
On Thu, 2004-07-15 at 11:25, Harald Hoyer wrote:
I can't believe screensavers are this popular to Linux users...
What a long thread :-) for *just* screensavers...
They all just want rss-glx/skyrocket and I'm set to make that happen
(one way or the other) ;-).
Nils
--
Nils Philippsen / Red Hat / nphilipp(a)redhat.com
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- B. Franklin, 1759
PGP fingerprint: C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F 656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011
7231
days inactive
7237
days old
desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org
46 comments
23 participants
participants (23)
-
Behdad Esfahbod -
Bill Nottingham -
Chris Farber -
Ed Mack -
Harald Hoyer -
Havoc Pennington -
Jef Spaleta -
Jens Knutson -
Luciano Miguel Ferreira Rocha -
Matthew Miller -
Mike A. Harris -
Mike Fedyk -
Mike Hearn -
Máirín Duffy -
Nils Breunese -
Nils Philippsen -
Panu Matilainen -
psychoelmo -
Ray Strode -
Steven Garrity -
Tom Weeks -
tony -
William Cohen