OSNews

Thats not a bug its a feature!

LOL ... Although I really do not have any major issues with Vista, that still made me laugh.

Agreed but I like the look of the new installer.

Konqueror is good enough for most people and Firefox lacks any kind of KDE integration.

I think it's more 'polish' than "love".

Wrong. http://en.opensuse.org/KDE/FirefoxIntegration

"Work in progress" says it all, just like the Qt4 version which has yet again gone quiet.

Edited 2009-09-04 14:02 UTC

Novell develops the integration features for openSUSE 11.2 and that one itself is still WIP.


Bull. Novell is true KDE supporter and won't drop that code anytime soon.
That said, please mind that the integration work is in no way a full Qt port. The amount of code required is actually quite small.
Using KDE dialogs within GTK apps is by no means anything new.
Refitting the settings window just requires a few changes default FF settings. You can also manually set its behavior using about:config.
KDE notification support is provided by a very small (20kb) FF extension: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/12196
Some features that don't work with KDE (like "Set as desktop background") are just removed. You can do the same manually using the Menu Editor extension: https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/710

Considering that the actually required code for those isn't that big, it's likely that other sane distributors also use and maintain it.

But Nokia try to port Firefox to Qt, a real Qt port, and yes, it have been quiet lately.

Chakra ships the Qt port of Firefox as default browser.
That port doesn't automatically turn FF into a KDE-friendly browser, because it's actually just a port of Cairo to Qt. Similar modifications as SUSE does today to FF have to be applied anyway.

Chakra is still in alpha state, hence they can afford to ship buggy browsers.

Nokia (or Trolltech as they were back then) looked at using Gecko as an engine and utilising better Qt integration with Firefox. They found that not only was it rather complex to do technically but they encountered, not resistance exactly, but a lack of willingness to smooth things along at Mozilla. They then decided that WebKit was the way to go.

If Mozilla is unwilling, why is the Qt port part of Mozilla trunk?

Not really - "most" people want a web browser that's good at browsing the web, and won't put up with non-renderable pages (esp. if the pages themselves are not relying on anything special like flash).

Arora is nice (it can actually be faster than FF 3.5), but perhaps Kubuntu should work on standardizing on Chrom[e,ium] instread. It already integrates with the kde desktop better than Firefox. And man, is it fast & light, even with slow hardware.

I do miss konqueror. It was such a lightweight browser which worked fine for non-bloated pages. But I had to quit kubuntu (after 8.04), basically because of lack for a proper network manager. Now I am extremely happy with crunchbang.

Well, maybe, but it can be made to look fairly nice. I'll put up a screenshot when I get home.

http://i29.tinypic.com/v6jli1.jpg

This on kubuntu jaunty. Also, the file picker and the rest of the menus are nicely intregrated. If you meant that firefox should look like this out-of-the-box without jumping through hoops, then you might have a point.

I tried arora and I like what I see so far. It is fast and simple reminding me firefox's early days (see phoenix).

Do yourself a favor and try chromium too:

https://launchpad.net/~chromium-daily/+archive/ppa

You won't regret it.

Do yourself a favor and try chromium too:

https://launchpad.net/~chromium-daily/+archive/ppa

You won't regret it. "

Chromium as a secondary browser works nicely.

However, it doesn't support printing, and will occasionally cause KWin desktop effects to go haywire (disabling compositing will make things work for a bit, but restarting X is required to fix things). There's also a lack of extensions/plugins/addons.

But, as an adjunct to Firefox, it makes web browsing on Linux very good .. even fun again.

If you've done nothing but beat your dog, then petting it once will mean giving it love.

If you've done nothing but pet your dog, it's a little different.

That's an appropriate comparison. I have to use Ubuntu at work and it's as if they go out of their way to damage KDE, so that people will get so disgusted with it that they'll switch to Gnome.

The problem with Kubuntu is not that it's being intentionally broken - it's just their shortage of resources. Blaming Kubuntu is stupid, because it's only so much a few guys can do.

It's a shame, really. It would be in KDE upstreams best interest to see that Kubuntu works well, because that's the distro they are going to get the majority of the users from. If you have a company policy specifying "Ubuntu", that's what you are going to use - and install kubuntu-desktop metapackage to get the kde environment.

Most of the breakage is done by other teams -- mostly Canonical's Launchpad developers who can't (refuse?) to make Rosetta compatible with KDE's language files.


Why should KDE wish that other distribute broken packages? Of course it's in KDE's interest that Kubuntu works well


Wishful thinking.



Why would a company mandate the use of a bleeding edge distro instead of SUSE Linux Enterprise or Red Hat Enterprise Linux (or CentOS)?

Because... Most of the time it works better (under GNOME) than those two you just mentioned?

Under KDE, Ubuntu is complete disaster!

Edited 2009-09-04 15:28 UTC

I can't confirm that. With a few minor exceptions, GNOME is pretty much the same under every distro.

Is l10n the only thing broken in Kubuntu these days? I don't think that will be a big problem, since you can always use english (I think most "professional" users of Windows use english too).




I mean this in the sense that the upstream should really test Kubuntu and put some time in ensuring that it works ok. Instead of bitching about how you can't judge KDE because of Kubuntu.



Because those cost (lots of) money, are targeted for server, and are not .deb based. If you are developing for a deb based system (e.g. Maemo/Debian), you'll want a deb based host distro as well. Also, Ubuntu has a non-bleeding-edge LTS version.

CentOS costs money?????




No, not really.



No user cares. zypper works really well -- RPM or not.



Huh? Build Service happily generates debs as well as RPMs.


Their "LTS" versions are only non-bleeding edge after months of bug fixing. Desktop components have only 3 years of support on Ubuntu LTS.

As someone who happens to have a lot of experience in this particular area, I would say that CentOS can be used on the desktop. But even in an enterprise environment, where stability (in the sense of "unchanging") is a major plus... I still prefer something a little more current for desktops. My clients and I have run the gamut, over the years, from CentOS to Ubuntu to Fedora. And currently, Ubuntu fits the bill most optimally. Which probably annoys you, Kurt. But it's true enough.

Huh? Build Service happily generates debs as well as RPMs. "

Part of development is debugging the .deb build and installation process. You'll want to be in a native deb environment for that.

Also, packaging is not a trivial skillset. It's best to bank on one packaging system that your employees will have to get familiar with.


Their "LTS" versions are only non-bleeding edge after months of bug fixing. Desktop components have only 3 years of support on Ubuntu LTS. "

But after those 3 years, you'll be running the next LTS (which has, in turn, managed to stabilize).

Sometimes, the distro you are to use is dictated by the other software you'll have to use. Sometimes the choice is between Debian or Ubuntu, and Ubuntu is arguably the better of the two for desktop use.

CentOS may be alright, but the community is nowhere near that of Debian/Ubuntu - and community matters, even if many of them are clueless.

No, but it's the most visible and easiest to document part.


Very arrogant, anglo-centristic view.


Not outside of English-speaking countries.

Well, I don't think in countries like Spain, France or even Germany - but I can confirm that in the Netherlands probably the majority of ppl run windows in English. Most companies here do... Then again, the dutch pretty much all speak English and aren't chauvinistic ;-)

I did say "as if". I certainly didn't meant that they go deliberately out of their way to break KDE.

I disagree, have a look at Mint KDE CE .. only few people are working on it, but they're doing a real good work, and they're building it on top of Ubuntu not Kubuntu ...
Even distros with smaller communities are managing to deliver a high quality KDE Desktop (like Pardus) ..
Canonical(Kubuntu) folks should learn from them if they're serious about KDE ...

Mint's KDE is almost the same as Kubuntu's. They don't compile KDE on their own or use Debian's KDE packages. Mint KDE has the same language pack bugs as Kubuntu:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/19616885@N00/3358984527/in/set-7215760...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/19616885@N00/3786255180/in/set-7215760...

"If you've done nothing but beat your dog, then petting it once will mean giving it love.

If you've done nothing but pet your dog, it's a little different."

QFT.

Kurt, if you channeled just half the energy that you expend complaining into actually helping, then I have no doubt that Kubuntu would be an absolute showcase distro for KDE4. But that is not your objective, is it.

Edited 2009-09-04 19:44 UTC

Kurt, if you channeled just half the energy that you expend complaining into actually helping, then I have no doubt that Kubuntu would be an absolute showcase distro for KDE4. But that is not your objective, is it. "
Huh? I just made a very short list of 4 features that every KDE distro has -- even older Kubuntus had them.

The netbook GUI is targeted for KDE 4.4 (=January). No "help" is going to change that.

And: Why does Kubuntu deserve more help than other distros?
Why should one help a specific distro anyway instead of putting ones work into upstream projects?

Edited 2009-09-04 19:59 UTC

Why do you conduct such an ongoing vendetta against *buntu?


The KDE project refuses to do distro packaging. If you do a Google search, you will find that one of the most major excuses^Wreasons put forth for KDE4 breakage is... distro packaging.

Maybe it's true. And maybe it's not. But you make a good point for reducing duplication of effort. Perhaps you could volunteer to do upstream packaging for major distros? Much duplicated effort could be eliminated in that way.

I contribute to upstream projects and won't waste my time doing work for Kubuntu that every other distro already does well.

Like what, specifically?

I'm mostly a translator. I'm not telling exactly in which project I'm most active, because for legal reasons I contribute with my full name, but I also care deeply about privacy and don't like my real full name floating through forums / comment sections.

Occasionally I also submit source code patches. Those usually improve usability (fix icons etc), because I can't really program very well.

Then there's the usual bug reporting.

Your attitude towards Kubuntu might be unfriendly, but it is kind-of deserved imho. Esp if you're a translator I can understand the frustration. I know and respect the two KDE-canonical employees (Aurelien and Riddell) but agree that Ubuntu puts less work in Kubuntu as it's user base would justify.

Because the work of upstream goes to waste if the packagers screw it up. Kubuntu is the most important delivery route of the software to end users, mainly because the popularity of Ubuntu dwarves the other distros.

I haven't checked how many patches Kubuntu applies to KDE (over the ones already applied for Debian), but I can't believe they can break it that much; basically they don't have enough manpower to break it ;-).

That is not the result of packaging: http://www.flickr.com/photos/19616885@N00/sets/72157608562200171/

No. it is not. KDE is nearly fully translated to German so that English string *shouldn't* be there. ref: http://l10n.kde.org/stats/gui/trunk-kde4/team/de/

It's because Ubuntu doesn't sync upstream translations automatically but expects team coordinators to sync them back and forth... and this is supposing a lot!. Distros like suse, mandriva or fedora just give their l10n volunteers the strings they have modified from any given project so they have only to translate suse-specific, fedora-specific (about 10000-15000 strings... packages and then they get the rest of the language packs from upstream. Ubuntu not. Ubuntu has decided that is better to give l10n volunteers the whole lot to translate (about 1/2 million!!) .

And speaking of quality, Canonical permits any user fooling upstream translations (done upstream by people like me at l10n.kde.org) through Rosetta. l10n is not meant for everyone! but for people who cares and knows how to do things right, keeps translation coherent and so on... Most Rosetta people are amateurs that don't even know English or their native language basic grammar rules. Once we had a troll in my language's rosetta team that introduced absolute nonsense, insults and bad language.

Then, isn't fault of kubuntu devs for not having packaged according to upstream guideline or because of not having enough feedback from devs upstream so they get things right?. Just ask.



I wasn't awared of Ubuntu being the centre of the universe.

Jokes aside, I don't think Ubuntu is the *main* KDE "distribution channel". If KDE is to make it to a wider audience is not gonna be Kubuntu, IMHO.

If I had a nickel for every time I've read "It sounds like your distro didn't package KDE4 properly" I'd be rich.

And yet upstream refuses to get involved in packaging. Go figure.

The KDE devs have said over and over again that they do what they do for fun. And that is quite cool. Fun, love, and respect are about the only motivators out there that are worth a damn.

But doing something for fun does not automatically translate into something that is optimally usable by others.

Edited 2009-09-04 23:11 UTC

I mean, there should be a reciprocal feedback between KDE and distros so they can integrate the DE well. But not packaging. Why KDE devs should loose time packaging for an specific distro when they should be putting its whole efforts into closing bugs, developing the best DE they can...?. then, what is a distro supposed to do then if packaging is not their thing?.

Miguel,

I understand your concern about taking KDE devs away from what they likely do best. But this packaging issue, reason, excuse, whatever, has been going on for coming up on two years. Much more than that if you consider the somewhat lower volume of claims regarding poor KDE3 packaging. At a certain point, it makes sense for the project to stop blaming, running around in circles, and criticizing... and just do something to fix the problem, regardless of the fact that it shouldn't "have to be" their job.

Edited 2009-09-04 23:34 UTC

Many of the developers who do KDE packaging are also working directly in/on KDE. Or you could say that a lot of KDE people are also doing packaging but their "distro" cap on.

Yeah, even the decrepit adept was better than kpackagekit. That is how bad their current gui-based package manager is. Why can't they theme synaptic (a simple ln to ~/.gtkrc-2.0) and use that instead? Still, as long as they do not mess with apt, they can slap on any package manager gui frontend they want, as I won't be using it.

Pray tell, gently, what you have against the apt tools?

Most notably, it crashes during updates and installs and, in some cases, has glitchy dependency resolution. I last used it a few months ago just to see how it worked. Synaptic, in my experience, has been far more stable. Nowadays, however, I use neither, as apt offers me far more in flexibility and stability when managing my software packages.

Edited 2009-09-04 18:53 UTC

You do realize that *all* of these things use apt, right?

Why do you think I state that I do not need any of those apt frontends?

Edited 2009-09-05 07:03 UTC

First the person you replied to says:



And to that you say:



So, you are complaining that apt crashes and has problems.

But then you say, very confusingly, that:



Synaptic more stable than apt? Stuff and nonsense! Synatpic uses apt. So what are you trying to say?

What someone needs to do is "port" Synaptic to QT. Don't try to make something "better" ... it's obvious all those attempts (adept, kpackage, kpackagekit, etc) have failed. Just take the synaptic look/feel and port it to QT4. With that, everyone will be happy.

The first thing I do with any KDE-oriented distro is to install Synaptic. It's the only bit of GTK/GNOME that's on any of my systems.

No, Synaptic is on the same route as the Dodo before.
PackageKit is the distro-agnostic layer to do package management in the future.
Ubuntu's AppCenter / Software Store also uses PackageKit instead of directly interfacing with apt.

Saying that KPackageKit has failed, is way to early. KPackageKit is a young application.

Well, the GUI layer certainly has. What's behind it may be good, but the user-visible bits aren't.

Can't you read? KPackageKit is still work in progress.
In KDE's SVN it's still in "playground". Maybe for KDE 4.4 it'll move out there.

Can't you be polite?

I can read just fine. Can you?

The KPackageKit GUIs are horrible beyond belief. All the KDE apt GUIs are horrible. Until someone comes along and develops something along the lines of the Synaptic GUI for KDE, they will always be horrible. Simple as that.

KPackageKit didn't even have a usability review, yet.
Yes, its GUI currently sucks. Will it stay that way? No.
Do I know that for sure? Yeah, quite.

In fact I'm currently preparing a set of mock-ups to improve KPackageKit's GUI. I'm already in contact with its main developer. I can't give you a time frame, though, He says that is time is constrained by some other project. If we're lucky, it'll be done by KDE 4.4.

I thought that Kubuntu 7.10 was a fine release. That was the one where they integrated Dolphin with KDE3. Very stable, but 8.04 wouldn't work on the same hardware and that being the last of the KDE 3.x series, I haven't looked back.

d3lphin wasn't stable at all. I occasionally even got crashes and file managers seldom crash.

No, I'm quite happy with Kubuntu 8.x and 9.x as well, especially with KDE 4.3 for Kubuntu 9.04.

I'm running it on my eeePC 701 with only 512 MB RAM, my Celeron 2.8 GHz laptop with only 512 MB RAM, and my AMD Sempron 1.8 GHz with 1 GB of RAM.

Works quite nicely for all the things I do (OpenOffice, Firefox, Chromium, Flash videos, Kaffeine playing Xvid over wireless, Konsole sessions, and so on).

Yeah... Thats so true of my experience trying to do any administrative tasks from a gui in any linux distro ( ubuntu, opensuse, debian, gentoo). I'm trying out fedora now ( finally letting that old wound of the fedora /RHEL split heal),but I just instinctualy gravitate towards the command line.


Actually, come to think of it, I've had the same experience in OSX as well.

Looks like a problem with incompatible config/theme files. If I understand you correct, KDE was not installed before. That's why there weren't be any old (possibly incompatible) KDE config/theme files.

Edited 2009-09-05 18:49 UTC

"sic" is no abbreviation for "stupid, incomeptent, clown" or anything like that. "sic" just means that it's a verbatim quote. Nothing more, nothing less.