Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] pcmanfm bug
I confirm this bug in Lubuntu 10.10 (I don´t remember verion) 2011/6/17 Jean-Pierre Vidal Piesset jpx...@gmail.com I'm confirming this bug on Lubuntu 10.04 with pcmanfn 0.9.7 -- jpxsat ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Lubuntu-desktop] Fwd: LXDM or Lightdm ?
-- Mensaje reenviado -- De: Jorge Andrés Alvarez Oré winningl...@gmail.com Fecha: 13 de junio de 2011 22:41 Asunto: Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] LXDM or Lightdm ? Para: Julien Lavergne gi...@ubuntu.com (Sorry for my English) My littler opinion: Use lxdm for this cycle (We have used for long time and seen to be fine, also study the lightDM performance and let less work for developers for this cycle). Use lightDM for the next cycle (Developers will have more time for develop and study lightDM) 2011/6/9 Julien Lavergne gi...@ubuntu.com Le Wednesday 08 June 2011 à 23:26 +0100, Yorvyk a écrit : I've been running Ubuntu Oneiric with lightdm for a while and it appears to behave it's self OK. Having had a bit of a read about it I don't see an advantage in either, from a user's point of view, and I'm a bit lost with the technical (dis)advantages. A few thoughts. With the change to GTK3 and the potential problems to be resolved with that, are we adding another headache for the few competent devs we have. Or would having Lightdm give us one less problem, as others in the Ubuntu community would be dealing with it and we wouldn't have to worry about lxdm either. Would sticking with what we know be better as lxdm doesn't have any real problems and performs the function for which it is intended. In the past, we discovered some bugs in LXDM which was quite painful to investigate and fix. With a DM used by more people, and more developed, we decrease this kind of risk. Regards, Julien Lavergne ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Any major must fix before Beta issues left in Lubuntu?
+1 alternate CD It´s suppose that the minimal memory for use Lubuntu is 192MB, but with 256MB to install it, it´s impossible to use it with a very old computer. My suggestion it´s to share a text install (alternate CD) by default. Anyway now Lubuntu isn't for beginners Linux user, so with a text install no body will be complicated. (My experience: the first Linux distro that i install [Ubuntu 7.04], i installed with the alternate CD, with my 256MB of ram memory [and Pentium 4 celeron] was impossible to install with GUI. Even if was my first install i could do it without a problem. The installations it´s intuitive. Sorry for my English. 2011/3/30 PCMan pcman...@gmail.com Text based installer + 1. The alternate CD with console-based UI is good enough IMO if it can have l10n user interface. Windows installer has long been text-based since windows 3.1 and it's still text-based in windows xp. Nobody complains of this so why should we insist that there should be a graphical one? Yes, if you boot from Windows xp installer cd on a machine without OS, you'll enter text-based installer. The GUI part is only available after the basic system is set up. Actually, we can do the same. The text-based installer (part I) only installs base system and core components and then reboot and automatically login X11 with a super user. After boot, a GUI-based installer (part II) is launched and continues the remaining parts. This can make things much easier. The only problem with this approach is, we cannot have a good GUI-based UI for partitioning. Windows XP handle this in text-mode, too. However, I see no real problem here. The rationale is quite simple. Users who doesn't know how to use text-based UI are also the ones that will almost always choose automatic partitioning. Others who like to use customized and manual partitioning are definitely advanced power users who don't need a GUI installer. So don't put 80% of development resources to do what only 20% people need. Please, if someone know how to work with the text-based debian installer, consider this approach. Let's set up a base system with the text-based one, and continue the remainng parts in a GUI installer after rebooting into X11. This is also what Windows does. Comments? On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Jean-Pierre Vidal Piesset jpx...@gmail.com wrote: Unfortunately, it will be very difficult to reduce the memory footprint of the installer for 11.04. The other question this poses is, is it really necessary to have a graphical installer as the default for Lubuntu? Some time ago, there was a question on the mailing list What do you expect from Lubuntu and i think that a very important point is it will go where Ubuntu can't or something like that. A graphical installer is something that we do only one time (in theory) so if it's a little ugly (text) IMHO i don't see the problem. -- jpxsat ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Idea/Suggestion to say goodbye to xcreensaver
The first time that i installed Lubuntu I've surprised when see that the default screensaver consume 60-70% of my processor. So i deactivated it. For me turn off the monitor in x minutes is enough. Lubuntu is not only for slow machine, it's a energy saving OS too. In the lubuntu.net home page say it: lubuntu is a faster, more lightweight and *energy saving* variant of Ubuntu using LXDE. So, in my opinion xscreensaver should be removed and gnome-power-preferences should be in the start menu (or whatever you call :)) 2011/2/24 Tim Bernhard ohiom...@gmail.com Haven't screen-savers been around forever? Should most hardware be able to handle them? Does Lubuntu need to be stripped down further? I sort of think that many users expect a screen-saver built into their OS. I know my mother-in-law loves them for some reason. :) Personally, I have no use for screen-savers, especially since I'm concerned with maximizing battery life. But Lubuntu needs to satisfy all users. Would shipping Lubuntu with xscreensaver disabled by default be a better option? Also, I hate screen locks on my machines. I would NOT want my screen to lock every time it went blank. Having it as an option would be nice, but not as default. Tim On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Yorvyk yorvik.ubu...@googlemail.comwrote: On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 16:23:36 -0300 Jean-Pierre Vidal Piesset jpx...@gmail.com wrote: Lubuntu team: Since Lubuntu is targeted for low-spec computers, xcreensaver is not a good choice to use since it causes problems such as: - In my three (old) machines I must kill the xcreensaver daemon in order to be able to install the system. - The idea is to make a good-looking effect but with older video cards the screensaver hangs or it is terribly slow. In fact in those three machines, once Lubuntu is installed I just remove xcreensaver and let the power-manager doing the trick of shutting-off my screen. It saves me from another app-running and the effect wanted is done (and even better since it shutts the screen off, it doesn't blank it... so it's *more energy efficiency for Lubuntu*) Speaking about this to Julien he pointed me to a problem I haven't seen: lock the screen. So, Googling a little i've found xtrlock, something very lightweigth to use that locks the screen until you type your user pass: everything is locked and your mouse pointer becomes a blue lock (but since the screen will be off, you won't tell ;) The way to implement this would be that as soon as the power-manager shuts off the screen it launches the xtrlock... but this would take Lubuntu devs to perform the task of coding it into the gnome-power-manager. I stop here, waiting for reactions and good-wellcoming :) I think I've commented before about screen-savers. I have never seen a justifiable reason for there existence apart from locking the machine if required.. They serve no other purpose, other than using energy, like you, I either disable or remove them from my machines. Your idea for locking the machine for those that require this function but, it's a bit late in the cycle for anything new to be implemented as feature freeze occurs at the end of the month. I would suggest putting it on launchpad as a feature request. -- Steve Cook (Yorvyk) http://lubuntu.net ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
