Error when building gnome-shell with jhbuild
Hi everyone, I've been trying gnome-shell by building it with jhbuild for a while (I always come back to gnome2 because of the unstability of the shell) and it worked with several missing dependencies to add during the build. Right now, I'm on Fedora 14 : -- xion@ix ~$ uname -a Linux ix 2.6.35.11-83.fc14.i686.PAE #1 SMP Mon Feb 7 06:57:55 UTC 2011 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux -- ... and I'm stuck on one phase (gnome-shell in fact). -- ... ... cp gnome-shell-jhbuild gnome-shell.tmp && mv gnome-shell.tmp gnome-shell GENcalendar-server/org.gnome.Shell.CalendarServer.service GISCAN Gvc-1.0.gir GICOMP Gvc-1.0.gir GISCAN St-1.0.gir GISCAN Shell-0.1.gir (process:23200): GLib-GObject-WARNING **: specified class size for type `ShellEmbeddedWindow' is smaller than the parent type's `GtkWindow' class size (process:23200): GLib-CRITICAL **: g_once_init_leave: assertion `initialization_value != 0' failed Function 'shell_embedded_window_get_type' returned G_TYPE_INVALID Command '['/home/xion/Workspace/GnomeShell/src/gnome-shell/src/tmp-introspecthheZfQ/Shell-0.1', '--introspect-dump=/home/xion/Workspace/GnomeShell/src/gnome-shell/src/tmp-introspecthheZfQ/types.txt,/home/xion/Workspace/GnomeShell/src/gnome-shell/src/tmp-introspecthheZfQ/dump.xml']' returned non-zero exit status 1 make[3]: *** [Shell-0.1.gir] Erreur 1 make[3] : on quitte le répertoire « /home/xion/Workspace/GnomeShell/src/gnome-shell/src » make[2]: *** [all] Erreur 2 make[2] : on quitte le répertoire « /home/xion/Workspace/GnomeShell/src/gnome-shell/src » make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Erreur 1 make[1] : on quitte le répertoire « /home/xion/Workspace/GnomeShell/src/gnome-shell » make: *** [all] Erreur 2 *** Erreur durant l'étape « build » de gnome-shell: ## Erreur lors de l'exécution de make *** [37/40] I don't really know what to do. Is it some trouble in the current source code which isn't compilable ? Why make it available if we cannot compile it ? A more detail output is on http://pastebin.com/XdjHfr1r Thanks for your help Alexandre Kaspar -- http://www.wox-xion.ch ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: A few comments regarding Gnome-shell
On 03/12/2011 07:06 AM, David Prieto wrote: > Florian, > > Basic keyboard navigation in the overview has landed today - > keyboard focus can be moved to a particular element with > Ctrl-Alt-Tab, then its items can be navigated using the arrow keys. > > > I have had the chance to try this and I have to say, I still think it's > too difficult. Just to be clear, Ctrl-Alt-Tab in GNOME 3.x is supposed to be like Ctrl-Alt-Tab in GNOME 2.x--an obscure feature that the vast majority of users never even learn about. It's not there be an everyday interface for most users, it's there to support accessibility (eg, blind people using a screen reader, or people using an alternative input method with no mouse, who need every interface element to be reachable by keyboard, in a predicable way). A lot of the work that went into that is reusable for other, simpler, keyboard navigation interfaces in the future, but we don't have any design for that at this point. 3.2... -- Dan ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Just another Feedback Post
On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Christoph Hack wrote: > Dear Gnome Shell Team! > > I started trying out gnome-shell via jhbuild the day before yesterday > and I am deeply impressed! Well done! > > The things I like most are the new automatic workspace management, the > notification system, the maximize (half) function per DnD, single > instances per default and a few more features. :) > > Even going through the activities overview when switching windows starts > to makes sense now. First I liked it, then on the next day I was a bit > annoyed, but now I think I have already adapted to the less distracting > working habit. Hopefully the new notification system will finally bring > the remaining constant window switching habit to an end once the > applications are starting to use it. > > So, and here comes the list of things I don't currently like: > > (1) Currently the most annoying thing is when I try to click on an Icon > in the bottom notification bar. Let's say "Banshee". Whenever my mouse > pointer reaches the icon, the icon moves away and the title of the > Application (in that case "Banshee") appears beside it. Unfortunately, I > can't simply click on the text (that took me some time to find out, first > I just thought the system isn't always reacting), so I have to start > chasing the small icon... Please change that :) This is bug https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=630842. The fix will land before code freeze. > (2) When I click to adjust the volume bar in the system panel, the audio > "bubble" stays open, so I can re-adjust it and so on, which is good. But > when I click on "Bluetooth on/off" the bubble closes immediately, so I > can't see the button toggling its state (Have i hit the correct entry?) > and I can't change additional options like "Bluetooth Visibility on/off". > Imho all those "bubbles" should stay open until I click somewhere else. It's been talked about, gcampax should be able to give more information. > (3) Pressing Strg+Alt+Tab in the overview to gain keyboard support is not > very intuitive and the combination is hard to type. > > (4) Switching open windows by name (by hitting , typing > "Terminal" or "Chrome" and pressing ) is nearly unusable on my > small Eee (Atom CPU) since the search feature takes quite long to react, > blocking the whole workflow. This is due to icons taking so long to load, and the biggest workflow breaker for me right now. Not sure if there is going to be a fix before gnome3 is released, but I hope so. > (5) The fonts in the shell theme are far too big. I've changed the font > settings on my Eee to 78 dpi, but the shell fonts aren't affected so they > are now twice as big (felt sense) as the application fonts. There is > already a bug report with patches, so please integrate it. > > (6) The gnome-terminal (and maybe other transparent windows) has only an > transparent background when its fully maximized and a solid one when it's > in normal mode or maximized to only one half of the screen. Bug or > intention? Sounds like https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=635268 > So, that's all. Keep up the good work! > > Regards, > Christoph > > > ___ > gnome-shell-list mailing list > gnome-shell-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list > ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Do we need DBusMenu in the Shell?
On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Giovanni Campagna wrote: > Open Planet GNOME. Almost half of the latest posts relates on GNOME, KDE > and Canonical collaboration story, which is all around libappindicator > and StatusNotifier / dbusmenu. > One year ago, libappindicator was rejected because it needed integration > in GNOME Shell and Gtk+. Three days, Unity was unveiled, and everything > went well with considering Ubuntu community the "bad guys" that forked > GNOME, starting with Ayatana. I of course know this is not true, but > this is the impression I got from the outside (I only started > contributing to GNOME some months later). > Today, on the other hand, things reversed. Public opinion is now that > GNOME rejected, and still is opposing, Canonical per se. And of course, > all the flaming around GNOME Census didn't help here. We don't want a > large part of our user base to consider GNOME Shell a Red Hat project > (again, this is what is perceived from the outside). > First, because this is not true: not just Novell, Intel, and all the > various other companies, but also a great of individuals are making up > what GNOME 3 will be, in Fedora, OpenSuse, Debian, Gentoo, Arch and > maybe Ubuntu as well. > Second, because even if all developers were paid by one organization, we > would have failed if we didn't pass the message that GNOME is a body, a > project, and an organization, but most important GNOME is a community of > people, working for the advancement of free software. > We're about to release GNOME 3. We need the best publicity to have this > adopted by the majority of people. After all, our goal is a GNOME > desktop on every system, right? But if people switch to Xfce or KDE or > Unity (or, ugh, Mac OS and Windows) for political issues with the > project, rather than usability, design, technical bugs, then we're > wasting our precious developer time. > So I think we should give Canonical and the general public a big signal > of collaboration. It doesn't matter if this will have no direct effect > in terms of code and upstreaming of patches, we'll have done the right > thing and people will know. > The small step I'm talking about is support of DBusMenu icons in GNOME > Shell Message Tray. Yes, it does not fit the design (which calls for > notifications, not menus) and it is not used by anything inside GNOME > now. But code is there, in a bug where I proposed for the status area; > it would require some changes to adapt to last Gnome Shell version, but > is mostly fine, and has no external dependencies (implements the DBus > protocol directly). > Anyway, the reason I'm proposing this is not technical (libnotify with > persistence is by far better than StatusNotifier, I think we all agree > here), it is political. > We need to show we're open to technologies developed elsewhere, no > matter how dirty they are. Look at browsers and HTML5, which is the most > horrible application platform ever invented by man: they're all > competing on who is be the most compatible with the others and with the > spec. > I hope this will start a positive discussion, at least to make sure > we're not ignoring this, which is a serious issue from a PR standpoint. > > Giovanni Campagna > > ___ > gnome-shell-list mailing list > gnome-shell-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list > GNOME could use some damage control from the marketing and PR teams. I don't think code should be adopted for political reasons only technical ones. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Just another Feedback Post
Dear Gnome Shell Team! I started trying out gnome-shell via jhbuild the day before yesterday and I am deeply impressed! Well done! The things I like most are the new automatic workspace management, the notification system, the maximize (half) function per DnD, single instances per default and a few more features. :) Even going through the activities overview when switching windows starts to makes sense now. First I liked it, then on the next day I was a bit annoyed, but now I think I have already adapted to the less distracting working habit. Hopefully the new notification system will finally bring the remaining constant window switching habit to an end once the applications are starting to use it. So, and here comes the list of things I don't currently like: (1) Currently the most annoying thing is when I try to click on an Icon in the bottom notification bar. Let's say "Banshee". Whenever my mouse pointer reaches the icon, the icon moves away and the title of the Application (in that case "Banshee") appears beside it. Unfortunately, I can't simply click on the text (that took me some time to find out, first I just thought the system isn't always reacting), so I have to start chasing the small icon... Please change that :) (2) When I click to adjust the volume bar in the system panel, the audio "bubble" stays open, so I can re-adjust it and so on, which is good. But when I click on "Bluetooth on/off" the bubble closes immediately, so I can't see the button toggling its state (Have i hit the correct entry?) and I can't change additional options like "Bluetooth Visibility on/off". Imho all those "bubbles" should stay open until I click somewhere else. (3) Pressing Strg+Alt+Tab in the overview to gain keyboard support is not very intuitive and the combination is hard to type. (4) Switching open windows by name (by hitting , typing "Terminal" or "Chrome" and pressing ) is nearly unusable on my small Eee (Atom CPU) since the search feature takes quite long to react, blocking the whole workflow. (5) The fonts in the shell theme are far too big. I've changed the font settings on my Eee to 78 dpi, but the shell fonts aren't affected so they are now twice as big (felt sense) as the application fonts. There is already a bug report with patches, so please integrate it. (6) The gnome-terminal (and maybe other transparent windows) has only an transparent background when its fully maximized and a solid one when it's in normal mode or maximized to only one half of the screen. Bug or intention? So, that's all. Keep up the good work! Regards, Christoph ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Do we need DBusMenu in the Shell?
On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 03:57:58PM +0100, Giovanni Campagna wrote: > I hope this will start a positive discussion, at least to make sure > we're not ignoring this, which is a serious issue from a PR standpoint. Please everyone just focus on GNOME 3. Speaking as a list moderator. Raise it again after GNOME 3.0 is actually out. Until that time, we have a GNOME 3.0 to get out. -- Regards, Olav ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Do we need DBusMenu in the Shell?
Open Planet GNOME. Almost half of the latest posts relates on GNOME, KDE and Canonical collaboration story, which is all around libappindicator and StatusNotifier / dbusmenu. One year ago, libappindicator was rejected because it needed integration in GNOME Shell and Gtk+. Three days, Unity was unveiled, and everything went well with considering Ubuntu community the "bad guys" that forked GNOME, starting with Ayatana. I of course know this is not true, but this is the impression I got from the outside (I only started contributing to GNOME some months later). Today, on the other hand, things reversed. Public opinion is now that GNOME rejected, and still is opposing, Canonical per se. And of course, all the flaming around GNOME Census didn't help here. We don't want a large part of our user base to consider GNOME Shell a Red Hat project (again, this is what is perceived from the outside). First, because this is not true: not just Novell, Intel, and all the various other companies, but also a great of individuals are making up what GNOME 3 will be, in Fedora, OpenSuse, Debian, Gentoo, Arch and maybe Ubuntu as well. Second, because even if all developers were paid by one organization, we would have failed if we didn't pass the message that GNOME is a body, a project, and an organization, but most important GNOME is a community of people, working for the advancement of free software. We're about to release GNOME 3. We need the best publicity to have this adopted by the majority of people. After all, our goal is a GNOME desktop on every system, right? But if people switch to Xfce or KDE or Unity (or, ugh, Mac OS and Windows) for political issues with the project, rather than usability, design, technical bugs, then we're wasting our precious developer time. So I think we should give Canonical and the general public a big signal of collaboration. It doesn't matter if this will have no direct effect in terms of code and upstreaming of patches, we'll have done the right thing and people will know. The small step I'm talking about is support of DBusMenu icons in GNOME Shell Message Tray. Yes, it does not fit the design (which calls for notifications, not menus) and it is not used by anything inside GNOME now. But code is there, in a bug where I proposed for the status area; it would require some changes to adapt to last Gnome Shell version, but is mostly fine, and has no external dependencies (implements the DBus protocol directly). Anyway, the reason I'm proposing this is not technical (libnotify with persistence is by far better than StatusNotifier, I think we all agree here), it is political. We need to show we're open to technologies developed elsewhere, no matter how dirty they are. Look at browsers and HTML5, which is the most horrible application platform ever invented by man: they're all competing on who is be the most compatible with the others and with the spec. I hope this will start a positive discussion, at least to make sure we're not ignoring this, which is a serious issue from a PR standpoint. Giovanni Campagna ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: icons
Hello there, I kind of agree here, those icons don't look very nice. Too light on the top and too dark on the bottom, they don't blend well with, for example the next/prev arrows. Those have a lower contrast and thinner borders plus they don't look as bumpy. They could use some love indeed. Cheers, Alberto 2011/3/12 Bob Hazard : > On 10 March 2011 03:20, Robert Park wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 5:12 PM, wrote: >>> But is there any plan to replace the ugly default gnome icons with a new >>> fresh set of icons >>> by final release of gnome 3? >> >> Just out of curiosity, but which icons are the 'ugly' default ones? I >> hope you're not calling Tango ugly... > > > The default zoom-in/zoom-out icons in gnome always look really bad to > me. I understand the difficulty in not wanting to look like the Find > icon or Add/Remove but they catch my eye as if they were from a > different set > > http://www.gnome.org/img/flash/gnome3-teaser.png > > > I'm a big fan of the Tango philosophy though, especially at 16x16 > where the well defined edges are great, such as in the nautilus places > bar. > > -- > Sent from my Amiga > ___ > gnome-shell-list mailing list > gnome-shell-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list > ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: icons
On 10 March 2011 03:20, Robert Park wrote: > On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 5:12 PM, wrote: >> But is there any plan to replace the ugly default gnome icons with a new >> fresh set of icons >> by final release of gnome 3? > > Just out of curiosity, but which icons are the 'ugly' default ones? I > hope you're not calling Tango ugly... The default zoom-in/zoom-out icons in gnome always look really bad to me. I understand the difficulty in not wanting to look like the Find icon or Add/Remove but they catch my eye as if they were from a different set http://www.gnome.org/img/flash/gnome3-teaser.png I'm a big fan of the Tango philosophy though, especially at 16x16 where the well defined edges are great, such as in the nautilus places bar. -- Sent from my Amiga ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: A few comments regarding Gnome-shell
Florian, Basic keyboard navigation in the overview has landed today - keyboard focus > can be moved to a particular element with Ctrl-Alt-Tab, then its items can > be navigated using the arrow keys. > I have had the chance to try this and I have to say, I still think it's too difficult. You can't use the arrow keys right after opening Activities, and the Ctrl-Alt-Tab combination is very undiscoverable. Why not highlight one of the elements right away? And, why not use just Tab instead of Ctrl-Alt-Tab? ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
