On 31 Mar 2014, at 22:41 , mk-li...@email.de wrote:
> So, obviously the test program fiddles with the ICNS file at startup and
> restores it when shutting down…
> What’s going on there and what can go wrong?
So, I figure now that the problem is actually due to the fact that the icon at
runtime g
On Mon, 31 Mar 2014 09:52:58 AM Shantanu Tushar Jha wrote:
> In any case, I have two screenshots - [1] shows the config detecting one of
> my extra drives that it is not including by default. If I want it to be
> indexed, I remove it from the list which gives you [2]. Now, looking at
> this UI, the
On Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:01:45 PM Kevin Krammer wrote:
> he question is how you define an extension.
> Konqueror had extensions/plugins for many years, the difference to those of
> other browsers is that they are written in C++ instead of JavaScript.
As commonly used by the major browsers - script
On Tuesday, 2014-04-01, 06:54:36, Lindsay Mathieson wrote:
> No extensions/plugins - there's a number of extensions in firefox I just
> don't wwant to do without.
>
> However Aandrea is porting rekonq to K5 and there is a proposal for an
> extension api.
>
> For me extensions are close to being
On Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:39:47 AM Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > I'm not trying to bash anyone, I'm just really wondering about that. Is
> > rekonq good enough for most KDE users (I find that hard to believe)?
>
> Why do you think it's hard to believe?
>
> I use rekonq for almost everything and for my
Icon-wise there is progress on my end. I peeked into kmines’ sources (since it does show its icon properly on MacOSX and has very short source code) ...… and it turned out that it is important in which order the CMake directives kde4_add_app_icon() and kde4_add_executable() are appearing in CMakeLi
On Monday, 2014-03-31, 15:13:22, Josh Liberty wrote:
> I'm not trying to bash anyone, I'm just really wondering about that. Is
> rekonq good enough for most KDE users (I find that hard to believe)? Is
> everyone just using Firefox/Chrome?
I am using Konqueror.
Have been for many, many years :-)
Em seg 31 mar 2014, às 15:13:22, Josh Liberty escreveu:
> I'm not trying to bash anyone, I'm just really wondering about that. Is
> rekonq good enough for most KDE users (I find that hard to believe)?
Why do you think it's hard to believe?
I use rekonq for almost everything and for my full daily
On Saturday, March 29, 2014 11:38:59 Vishesh Handa wrote:
> Isn't that just because you've bad experiences with Nepomuk? Also, I'd love
> to know what kind of files you don't want it to index. I understand source
> code, but what else?
Temporary files, browser caches, configurations, build direct
On Monday 31 March 2014 14:25:00 Wolfgang Mader wrote:
> On Monday 31 March 2014 15:13:22 Josh Liberty wrote:
> > On , Roney Gomes wrote:
> > > On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 10:57 PM, Ian Wadham
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >> A subsidiary question. What replaces Konqueror now? Dolphin replaces
> > >> the
>
On Monday 31 March 2014 15:13:22 Josh Liberty wrote:
> On , Roney Gomes wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 10:57 PM, Ian Wadham
> >
> > wrote:
> >> A subsidiary question. What replaces Konqueror now? Dolphin replaces
> >> the
> >> file manager functionality, but what is the "official" supported K
On , Roney Gomes wrote:
On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 10:57 PM, Ian Wadham
wrote:
A subsidiary question. What replaces Konqueror now? Dolphin replaces
the
file manager functionality, but what is the "official" supported KDE
browser?
I guess it is Rekonq.
Why does the web browser seem to be such
On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 10:57 PM, Ian Wadham wrote:
> A subsidiary question. What replaces Konqueror now? Dolphin replaces the
> file manager functionality, but what is the "official" supported KDE browser?
I guess it is Rekonq.
--
Roney
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#u
13 matches
Mail list logo
