kde April 2020

kde@lists.fedoraproject.org

16 participants
13 discussions

How to set default session type to Plasma for sddm
by Roderick Johnstone 29 Oct '21

29 Oct '21

Hi How do I set the default session type for sddm to offer to be Plasma? I'm currently getting Gnome Classic? This is F22. Thanks Roderick Johnstone

7 13

Crashes
by Steve Grubb 04 Aug '20

04 Aug '20

Hello, I was curious about something. KDE has its own crash handling system. How does this community track any metrics around code stability if upstream gets reports? Kontact has segfaulted 20 times on me today. Each time it says it cannot generate a bug report. Abrtd does not seem to pick up anything. Shouldn't it? How does this community track when a recent update suddenly starts making things crash? Kontact was fine 3 weeks ago. I updated today (3 weeks of patches) and its crashing all the time to the point its unusable. It won't generate a bug report, abrtd seems not to notice either. -Steve

1 1

gtk settings and F32
by Ed Greshko 28 Apr '20

28 Apr '20

In System Setting on F31, under Application Style, there were GNOME/GTK Application Style settings for GTK Themes, Behavior, and Icon Themes. Now, in F32, also under Application Style, there is a button to configure GNOME?GTK Application Style. However, under that there is only selections for the theme. Is there no longer a way to select the Icon Theme for GTK applications? -- The key to getting good answers is to ask good questions.

2 1

Re: Blocking on user switching: redux
by Adam Williamson 28 Apr '20

28 Apr '20

On Tue, 2020-04-28 at 09:26 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 11:13 am, Adam Williamson > <adamwill(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > So, once again: do we think it makes sense to consider desktop user > > switching - that is, switching between multiple active desktop > > sessions > > for different users, without logging out and in - as release-blocking? > > Workstation WG agrees that user switching should be release blocking. > We trust QA will write the specific release criterion. Obvious thing to do would be to resurrect kparal's old draft. So, KDE team, since we'll be blocking on this for GNOME, do you want us to include KDE too or make it Workstation-only? Thanks! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net

2 3

Improving KDE groupings
by Carson Black 28 Apr '20

28 Apr '20

Currently, KDE's current groupings in Fedora are a hot button issue among users (i'd have tons of dollars if I had a dime for every time a user mentioned 3 browsers, 2 file managers, and 2 music players being present with default KDE spin groups) and gives many users the impression that either Fedora KDE is a bad KDE distro or that KDE Plasma is bad. As both a KDE developer and a Fedora contributor, this is clearly not ideal :). Rather than trying to waft through groupings including obsolete software older than me by several years (blech, Qt 3??), I decided to enumerate logical groupings of software from scratch here [1] for discussion. [1] - https://pagure.io/pontaoski-scratchpad/blob/master/f/kde.yaml

2 1

kde-20 wayland finally usable?
by Neal Becker 26 Apr '20

26 Apr '20

Just got latest update to f31 from [copr:copr.fedorainfracloud.org:zawertun:kde]. Once again, trying kde over wayland. Finally, it appears to be usable! Previously when I tested there were 3 showstoppers: 1. No multiple desktops 2. Bad results for hi-dpi 3. x2go didn't work and I need it Today it looks like all these issues are resolved :)

2 3

Blocking on user switching: redux
by Adam Williamson 20 Apr '20

20 Apr '20

Hi folks! So, during Fedora 32 Final blocker review, a bug relating to "user switching" came up for review: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1817708 I dug into the question of whether we have tended to consider the "log in / log out / shut down / reboot" criterion as covering user switching, and found that this issue is actually kinda outstanding and unresolved for a long time. Back in January 2015, we kinda provisionally decided that we *did* want to block on user switching bugs, by accepting this one as a blocker during a review meeting: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1184933 kparal was detailed to propose clearly adding it to the criteria, and he duly drafted up a change and mailed it to the relevant lists - test@, kde@ and desktop@: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2015-January/124811.html https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/kde/2015-January/014175.html https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/desktop/2015-January/011558.html However, here things foundered a bit because there was some opposition to the idea. The discussion is spread across the three lists, but my reading is broadly that there were distinct camps in favour of and against blocking on user switching bugs. Prominent "pro-blocking" folks were Michael Catanzaro and Kevin Kofler. Prominent "anti-blocking" folks were Matthias Clasen, Rex Dieter and Josh Boyer. Obviously that's a particularly awkward split because we have pro- and anti- folks on both the desktop and KDE teams. The discussion was pretty active, but in the end it sort of petered out without any definite conclusion being reached. The draft changes Kamil proposed were never made, and the criterion remained as it was before. For the purposes of our specific F32 blocker proposal we decided to adopt the principle that, since there was a discussion that clearly did not reach a consensus that user switching *should* be release-blocking, we could not really treat it as such, and thus we rejected the bug as a blocker. But I figured it would probably be a good idea to bring the topic up again and try to come to a definite conclusion this time. So, once again: do we think it makes sense to consider desktop user switching - that is, switching between multiple active desktop sessions for different users, without logging out and in - as release-blocking? Has anyone who was active in the previous discussion changed their mind on this? I suppose one question that could potentially arise is whether we could treat it as release-blocking for GNOME but not for KDE, or vice versa. In general I think it's a good goal to try and keep our standards similar across our release-blocking desktops, but I do think we could at least consider that, if the discussion seemed to be going in that direction. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net

8 12

Accounts in System Settings
by Syam Krishnan 18 Apr '20

18 Apr '20

Hi I had the following two entries in System Settings dysfunctional for a long time (several months, may be ever since I installed F31). 1. Online Accounts 2. Account Details The first one (online accounts) is now solved by manually installing accounts-qml-module, as suggested in the bug report https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1794594. The second one is unsolved. When I select Account Details, I see a page with error messages: ------ The module Account Details is not a valid configuration module. The diagnosis is: The desktop file settings-personalization-accountdetails.desktop does not specify a library" ----- I am not able to find an appropriate bug report. Can someone please help with this? Thanks and regards, Syam

1 0

Re: Blocking on user switching: redux
by Kamil Paral 17 Apr '20

17 Apr '20

On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 5:50 PM Patrick O'Callaghan <pocallaghan(a)gmail.com> wrote: > My use case is slightly different. I like to be able to log into a > basic user configuration to test something, without logging out of my > current session. That second desktop might even be running Gnome rather > than KDE. Would that also count as a blocker? > Hello Patrick. Our criteria are mostly concerned with a default Fedora installation (Workstation, KDE, Server, etc). We might even state it explicitly in this criterion. So no, switching users between different desktop environments is unlikely to be release blocking.

2 1

Fwd: Live-user Autologin is not properly configured in fedora-live-kde-base.ks
by Sreyan Chakravarty 09 Apr '20

09 Apr '20

I have just installed the custom Kickstart files for creating live images by: sudo dnf install -y custom-kickstarts fedora-kickstarts I am using a flattened Kickstart file by using ksflatten: ksflatten --config /usr/share/spin-kickstarts/fedora-live-kde.ks -o flat-fedora-live-kde.ks Now I use the livecd-creator to create my ISO: livecd-creator --verbose --config=flat-fedora-live-kde.ks --fslabel=Fedora-KDE --cache=/var/cache/live The build process completes without any errors. Let me know if you need the build log since it is too large for PasteBin. I don't know how to share it. But when I use this created ISO to boot I am greeted with the SDDM Login screen for the Live User. Screenshot here: https://imgur.com/a/nbqxrnK I clicked enter leaving the password field blank but I am unable to login. The weirdest part is the autologin configuration functionality is present in the kickstart files: In fedora-live-kde-base.ks Lines: 25 - 35 # set up autologin for user liveuser if [ -f /etc/sddm.conf ]; then sed -i 's/^#User=.*/User=liveuser/' /etc/sddm.conf sed -i 's/^#Session=.*/Session=plasma.desktop/' /etc/sddm.conf else cat > /etc/sddm.conf << SDDM_EOF [Autologin] User=liveuser Session=plasma.desktop SDDM_EOF fi This should setup the auto login for the Live User, but why doesn't it work ? I can find no errors in my build process, so what is going wrong ? Did they change the configuration for SDDM in someway ? If so why isn't it there in the Kickstart file ? I have tried to contact the maintainer for this Kickstart file, lets see if there are any replies. Thanks. -- Regards, Sreyan Chakravarty -- Regards, Sreyan Chakravarty

1 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

kde April 2020