Re: Strip incompatible characters from Windows partitions!
Am 16.05.2008 um 03:05 schrieb Evan: I don't know where the filename check is supposed to happen, but it isn't happening anywhere. I've tried via the cli, and via nautilus, and neither of them prevent me from using Windows-illegal characters. ... because they are perfectly legal on the OS you're currently running. By what you describe, I'm not sure wether Ubuntu is to blame here. IMHO, the best one could do is to introduce some Windows- compatibility mode. Prohibiting feature X here because it's forbidden there isn't a good idea. Markus - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dipl. Ing. Markus Hitter http://www.jump-ing.de/ -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Strip incompatible characters from Windows partitions!
On 16/05/2008, Markus Hitter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Prohibiting feature X here because it's forbidden there isn't a good idea. It is in this case because of Ubuntu's target population and the fact the NTFS / FAT32 are not native Linux file formats. By all means allow advanced users to turn this feature off but by default you should not be allowed to create files which cause such a problem. Alan -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Ubuntu beyond GTK apps?
I was reading /. and they have an article up about QGtkStyle http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/05/15/1319204 A new project called QGtkStyle by Trolltech Labs gives Qt4 based applications the possibility to integrate natively into Gtk based desktops like Gnome or Xfce. Instead of simply imitating Gtk styles QGtkStyle uses the Gtk theme engine directly. The project is still considered experimental, but is another step into better integration between Qt and Gtk applications. And it reminded me of something that I had been thinking about in the past; Ubuntu is GNOME-based, but does not always default to GNOME's app selections (e.g. Firefox, GIMP and OpenOffice.org as I recall). Wouldn't it be interesting to take that a step further and have Ubuntu represent the best Linux apps (e.g. K3B?), regardless of widget dependency? If QGtkStyle (or such) could seamlessly integrate them visually, I don't see why (beyond LiveCD size restrictions) that this wouldn't be a good idea... Anyway, just thought I'd mention the idea to see what people think. CK -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Strip incompatible characters from Windows partitions!
Scott Kitterman pisze: Doesn't wubi install Ubuntu into an existing Windows partition? Exactly. And then Ubuntu will happily let you create files that you can't read in Windows. It's weird. It just ocurred to me that when you email files, odds are the receiver is using Windows. Perhaps all the mail clients should be patched with similar warnings? That's probably a lot more common than copying from one partition to another. There's no need for that. If you receive an email attachement with a windows-illegal filename then the windows filesystem will refuse to save it under such name and you will be prompted for a name change. -- ## Przemysław Kulczycki Azrael Nightwalker ## # jabber: azrael[na]jabster.pl | tlen: azrael29a # ### www: http://reksio.ftj.agh.edu.pl/~azrael/ ### signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Ubuntu beyond GTK apps?
Le vendredi 16 mai 2008 à 11:26 +0200, Thomas Novin a écrit : On Fri, 2008-05-16 at 03:02 -0600, Conrad Knauer wrote: Wouldn't it be interesting to take that a step further and have Ubuntu represent the best Linux apps (e.g. K3B?), regardless of widget dependency? If QGtkStyle (or such) could seamlessly integrate them visually, I don't see why (beyond LiveCD size restrictions) that this wouldn't be a good idea... That would be amazing. I think a pretty long list can be easily made of KDE-apps that are better than their Gnome equivalents. - Amarok Rhythmbox - Konsole Gnome Terminal - Kate Gedit - Kdenlive ??? Dear, just switch to KDE, you'll have a nice desktop environment that will suit your applications. ;-) Seriously, using some specialized Qt programs that have no good equivalent in GNOME is very important (Rosegarden, Scribus, KDenlive...), but for standard tools this would make no sense. Cheers -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Ubuntu beyond GTK apps?
On Fri, 2008-05-16 at 03:02 -0600, Conrad Knauer wrote: Wouldn't it be interesting to take that a step further and have Ubuntu represent the best Linux apps (e.g. K3B?), regardless of widget dependency? If QGtkStyle (or such) could seamlessly integrate them visually, I don't see why (beyond LiveCD size restrictions) that this wouldn't be a good idea... That would be amazing. I think a pretty long list can be easily made of KDE-apps that are better than their Gnome equivalents. - Amarok Rhythmbox - Konsole Gnome Terminal - Kate Gedit - Kdenlive ??? Und so weiter.. Rgds -- Thomas Novin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell +46 730 665423 GPG Key ID CF62C14F http://xyz.pp.se/~thnov/gpg.asc -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Strip incompatible characters from Windows partitions!
Le vendredi 16 mai 2008 à 00:06 -0400, Scott Kitterman a écrit : On Thursday 15 May 2008 21:31, Evan wrote: On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 9:14 PM, Scott Kitterman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd say that if there's a bug it's in Windows. I could see a wishlist bug against Ubuntu to provide a way to check for this/suggest changes to avoid problematic filenames, but there is nothing inherently defective with the current behavior. Scott K I agree that there is no inherent problem with the Ubuntu code, and it should really be up to Windows to support more characters. However I can think of several situations where this could cause considerable problems for the end user. We should at the very least provide a warning that Naming a file on this partition with any of the following characters will prevent Windows from opening it. Are you sure you want to continue? Evan Personally I'm against such hand holding. If any such feature is provided, I think it should be off by default. I happen to have some legacy FAT32 and NTFS partitions for various reasons, but the odds that they will ever be read from Windows are very low. I don't think Ubuntu's design should be predicated on the idea that it's an adjunct to using Windows. Sorry for your legacies, but IMHO partitions with a Microfost-ish filesystem are meant to be used with Windows, and if you want to use the full possibilities Unix offers you, just use Unix filesystems. The default should be to be fully Windows-compliant - and you may add an option in /etc/fstab disabling character stripping. Why the hell would you use a Windows filesystem in a Linux-only environment?! I can only think of cases when Windows will have to access one day or another the filesystem: USB keys, external HD, Windows partitions on dual boot... Samba does not provide Windows with invalid characters when sharing files, and Linux must do the same with filesystems. Hope Ubuntu is more modest than you appear to see it. Serve the user, not the ideal technology you dream of in which every character is supported in filenames. When you're working on documents, being able to read it in a conference from your USB key is much more important than being allowed to keep a '?' in its filename, isn't it? -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Strip incompatible characters from Windows partitions!
Il giorno ven, 16/05/2008 alle 11.42 +0200, Milan Bouchet-Valat ha scritto: Hope Ubuntu is more modest than you appear to see it. Serve the user, not the ideal technology you dream of in which every character is supported in filenames. I keep a copy of my working files in an usb pen. This is FAT because I want to access it from every machine with an usb hole, and my working files (including bzr and hg repositories) are in a subdirectory. I expect that this use case is very common among ubuntu users nowadays and the default behaviour is the only one that does not get in the way. In any case, windows handling of file names has always been broken. You can create files from the command prompt or via FTP that make a whole mess in the graphical file manager.These are bugs in windows. An improvement could perhaps be having a default behavior of warning users only if windows boot files are present in the root of the disk. Vincenzo -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Strip incompatible characters from Windows partitions!
But clearly this issue can be seen as a limitation of the FAT filesystem, just not yet imposed at the highest level of the filesystem driver (kernel or userland)? Surely ext3 *would* allow a slash in a filename (i guess?), if the userland tools would just let the filesystem driver ever receive such a name, even if it might then break the filesystem since it would create an ambiguity with a subdirectory. I can't be quite sure about this but i assume that at a technical level, a slash could be just part of a filename in ext3, XFS or whatever. If that's the case, what would be the problem of implementing a restriction into the VFAT module akin to the restriction in ext3 not allowing to use slashes in filenames? Whether this restriction is synthetic or not would be IMO up to debate and should find its grounds on whether slashes in ext3 filenames are an artificact of high-level access to the filesystem or not (as we're dealing with this on Linux here it seems to be a good base for debate). Furthermore, does anyone know how OS X and/or other operating systems handle this issue? Samba not allowing/normalizing such filenames is i think a good hint that it shouldn't be considered sane to write such filenames to a FAT directory structure. 2008/5/16, Chris Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi Evan wrote: paths are slashes, while Windows has a considerable list (apostrophes, asterisks, etc). The problem is that it doesn't have a list, there are multiple lists and they aren't documented. NTFS will reject some filenames, win16/win32/win64/.net/etc. will reject others (as you have seen by Linux's ability to create files that Windows Explorer refuses to handle). There is no canonical list of filenames to avoid on Windows. See: http://blogs.msdn.com/michkap/archive/2006/11/03/941420.aspx That alone makes this (imho) a basically intractable problem, unfortunately. Cheers, -- Chris Jones -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Ubuntu beyond GTK apps?
Conrad Knauer wrote: I was reading /. and they have an article up about QGtkStyle http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/05/15/1319204 A new project called QGtkStyle by Trolltech Labs gives Qt4 based applications the possibility to integrate natively into Gtk based desktops like Gnome or Xfce. Instead of simply imitating Gtk styles QGtkStyle uses the Gtk theme engine directly. The project is still considered experimental, but is another step into better integration between Qt and Gtk applications. And it reminded me of something that I had been thinking about in the past; Ubuntu is GNOME-based, but does not always default to GNOME's app selections (e.g. Firefox, GIMP and OpenOffice.org as I recall). Wouldn't it be interesting to take that a step further and have Ubuntu represent the best Linux apps (e.g. K3B?), regardless of widget dependency? If QGtkStyle (or such) could seamlessly integrate them visually, I don't see why (beyond LiveCD size restrictions) that this wouldn't be a good idea... Anyway, just thought I'd mention the idea to see what people think. CK In my opinion Gnome has to change the HIG first. Although I really like the way affirmative actions are described with a verb instead of just OK it was not a good move to place the affirmative action on the right side of a dialog. I think this is a real usability issue when non-gnome apps are used where the OK button is on the left. It's particularly bad with applications like Eclipse where some dialogs use OK on the left side and other dialogs use Gnome standard dialogs where the OK equivalent action is on the right. There is no good reason for the affirmative action being the rightmost button which could not be reverted (different cultures, right/left handed people ...). Before that has been fixed, I prefer to not use KDE applications in a Gnome environment. Kai Schroeder -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: kill switch on with intel wifi 4965
Am Donnerstag, den 15.05.2008, 21:14 +0100 schrieb (``-_-´´) -- Fernando: I'm sorry to bring noise about Hardy, on a list now meant to Intrepid, but unable to find how to fix this in any other way, so if any dev could lend me an hand it would be great. I know this is not Ubuntu fault, but manufactors, but still, I know we can fix this. I've bough a new laptop (an ASmobile S37S, asus barebone) that has an Intel 4965 ABGN. I've search ubuntu foruns, lp, and googled all I could, but am unable to make the kill switch off, in order to turn the wifi on. The card is well identified by the kernel, but there is no way to make it seen to NetworkManager, or even turning on the led. Have you tried installing linux-backports-modules-hardy-generic? This fixes some issues with wireless LAN, laptop LEDs for example. signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Strip incompatible characters from Windows partitions!
On Fri, 16 May 2008 09:03:02 +0100 Alan Milnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 16/05/2008, Markus Hitter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Prohibiting feature X here because it's forbidden there isn't a good idea. It is in this case because of Ubuntu's target population and the fact the NTFS / FAT32 are not native Linux file formats. By all means allow advanced users to turn this feature off but by default you should not be allowed to create files which cause such a problem. While NTFS is closely associated with Windows, FAT is a defacto standard for portable storage devices. Making and kind of O/S assumptions about FAT is inherently incorrect. For NTFS, I can almost see sense in this and wouldn't be opposed if there were some NTFS spec or standard to base such a design on. I gather from another post in this thread that such a document does not really exist. I feel that you are saying that because I don't also use Windows, I'm not in Ubuntu's target population. I think this is completely wrong. I think fixing Bug 1 is about getting people to stop using Windows, not about using Windows and Ubuntu. I see value in easing transition for new users, but our target is an Ubuntu user, not an Ubuntu/Windows user. Scott K -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Strip incompatible characters from Windows partitions!
On Fri, 16 May 2008 11:42:28 +0200 Milan Bouchet-Valat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... Hope Ubuntu is more modest than you appear to see it. Serve the user, not the ideal technology you dream of in which every character is supported in filenames. When you're working on documents, being able to read it in a conference from your USB key is much more important than being allowed to keep a '?' in its filename, isn't it? First, many external storage devices come pre-formatted with FAT32. It is not at all a Windows specific F/S. Second, my concern isn't with files I manually name (I'm pretty unlikely to use file names that wouldn't be legal under any OS), but systems that generate files/names automatically. I would find it frustrating to get a big stack of Are you sure warnings when copying my maildir files (default storage method for my chosen MUA) to a USB stick. Scott K -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Strip incompatible characters from Windows partitions!
On 16/05/2008, Scott Kitterman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: While NTFS is closely associated with Windows, FAT is a defacto standard for portable storage devices. Agreed. It is not a Linux 'native' file format though. Making and kind of O/S assumptions about FAT is inherently incorrect. For NTFS, I can almost see sense in this and wouldn't be opposed if there were some NTFS spec or standard to base such a design on. I gather from another post in this thread that such a document does not really exist. That is a problem but the likes of SAMBA have some ways of at least attempting to stop you creating files that then cause problems. I feel that you are saying that because I don't also use Windows, I'm not in Ubuntu's target population. I think this is completely wrong. I think fixing Bug 1 is about getting people to stop using Windows, not about using Windows and Ubuntu. I see value in easing transition for new users, but our target is an Ubuntu user, not an Ubuntu/Windows user. Absolutely agree - that's why we should make this change and allow experienced users to switch it off. We want people to switch and a large percentage of them probably dip their toe in the water through things like dual booting etc. Alan -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: kill switch on with intel wifi 4965
Olá Sebastian e a todos. On Friday 16 May 2008 12:54:42 Sebastian Breier wrote: Am Donnerstag, den 15.05.2008, 21:14 +0100 schrieb (``-_-´´) -- Fernando: I'm sorry to bring noise about Hardy, on a list now meant to Intrepid, but unable to find how to fix this in any other way, so if any dev could lend me an hand it would be great. I know this is not Ubuntu fault, but manufactors, but still, I know we can fix this. I've bough a new laptop (an ASmobile S37S, asus barebone) that has an Intel 4965 ABGN. I've search ubuntu foruns, lp, and googled all I could, but am unable to make the kill switch off, in order to turn the wifi on. The card is well identified by the kernel, but there is no way to make it seen to NetworkManager, or even turning on the led. Have you tried installing linux-backports-modules-hardy-generic? This fixes some issues with wireless LAN, laptop LEDs for example. $ dpkg --get-selections linux-* linux-backports-modules-2.6.24-17-generic install linux-backports-modules-hardy install linux-backports-modules-hardy-generic install linux-generic install linux-headers-2.6.24-16 install linux-headers-2.6.24-16-generic install linux-headers-2.6.24-17 install linux-headers-2.6.24-17-generic install linux-headers-generic install linux-headers-lum-2.6.24-16-generic install linux-headers-lum-2.6.24-17-generic install linux-image install linux-image-2.6.24-16-generic install linux-image-2.6.24-17-generic install linux-image-generic install linux-libc-dev install linux-restricted-modulesinstall linux-restricted-modules-2.6.24-16-generic install linux-restricted-modules-2.6.24-17-generic install linux-restricted-modules-common install linux-restricted-modules-genericinstall linux-sound-baseinstall linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-16-generic install linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-17-generic install linux-wlan-ng install linux-wlan-ng-firmware install linux-wlan-ng-sourceinstall It seems I have them all. -- BUGabundo :o) (``-_-´´) http://Ubuntu.BUGabundo.net Linux user #443786GPG key 1024D/A1784EBB My new micro-blog @ http://BUGabundo.net ps. My emails tend to sound authority and aggressive. I'm sorry in advance. I'll try to be more assertive as time goes by... signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Ubuntu beyond GTK apps?
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 7:49 AM, Kai Schroeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Conrad Knauer wrote: I was reading /. and they have an article up about QGtkStyle http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/05/15/1319204 A new project called QGtkStyle by Trolltech Labs gives Qt4 based applications the possibility to integrate natively into Gtk based desktops like Gnome or Xfce. Instead of simply imitating Gtk styles QGtkStyle uses the Gtk theme engine directly. The project is still considered experimental, but is another step into better integration between Qt and Gtk applications. And it reminded me of something that I had been thinking about in the past; Ubuntu is GNOME-based, but does not always default to GNOME's app selections (e.g. Firefox, GIMP and OpenOffice.org as I recall). Wouldn't it be interesting to take that a step further and have Ubuntu represent the best Linux apps (e.g. K3B?), regardless of widget dependency? If QGtkStyle (or such) could seamlessly integrate them visually, I don't see why (beyond LiveCD size restrictions) that this wouldn't be a good idea... Anyway, just thought I'd mention the idea to see what people think. CK In my opinion Gnome has to change the HIG first. Although I really like the way affirmative actions are described with a verb instead of just OK it was not a good move to place the affirmative action on the right side of a dialog. [snip] Whether or not you agree with it, it's been written in the HIG for years and years, and it's the natural layout for long-time GNOME users (and Mac OS X users for that matter). Changing this at such a late point is just going to trigger an immense amount of frustration (I imagine it'd be like waking up and noticing your mouse axes flipped and your buttons were mapped the opposite direction). So no, the HIG does not need to change in this aspect. Instead, for those who actually care about this (read: pedants, KDE/Windows users), there's gtk_dialog_set_alternative_button_order() which has been around since GTK+ 2.6 (sometime 2k4). And with a small change to your .gtkrc file, you can have your cake and eat it too. And you can file bugs against applications that don't use this function with their dialogs and applications that violate the HIG (which is probably a sizable number, but since the people who presumably care about it don't speak up to developers...). I understand Qt has a similar ability for GNOME and Mac OS X support, but I've never had a want or need to look into it so I'm not sure what it is or how to use it. -A.Walton Kai Schroeder -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Ubuntu beyond GTK apps?
A. Walton wrote: On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 7:49 AM, Kai Schroeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Conrad Knauer wrote: I was reading /. and they have an article up about QGtkStyle http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/05/15/1319204 A new project called QGtkStyle by Trolltech Labs gives Qt4 based applications the possibility to integrate natively into Gtk based desktops like Gnome or Xfce. Instead of simply imitating Gtk styles QGtkStyle uses the Gtk theme engine directly. The project is still considered experimental, but is another step into better integration between Qt and Gtk applications. And it reminded me of something that I had been thinking about in the past; Ubuntu is GNOME-based, but does not always default to GNOME's app selections (e.g. Firefox, GIMP and OpenOffice.org as I recall). Wouldn't it be interesting to take that a step further and have Ubuntu represent the best Linux apps (e.g. K3B?), regardless of widget dependency? If QGtkStyle (or such) could seamlessly integrate them visually, I don't see why (beyond LiveCD size restrictions) that this wouldn't be a good idea... Anyway, just thought I'd mention the idea to see what people think. CK In my opinion Gnome has to change the HIG first. Although I really like the way affirmative actions are described with a verb instead of just OK it was not a good move to place the affirmative action on the right side of a dialog. [snip] Whether or not you agree with it, it's been written in the HIG for years and years, and it's the natural layout for long-time GNOME users (and Mac OS X users for that matter). Changing this at such a late point is just going to trigger an immense amount of frustration (I imagine it'd be like waking up and noticing your mouse axes flipped and your buttons were mapped the opposite direction). So no, the HIG does not need to change in this aspect. I actually wouldn't have dared to propose that as a new default to Gnome Upstream ;). I should have said that I also had in mind to make that option configurable. Instead, for those who actually care about this (read: pedants, KDE/Windows users), there's gtk_dialog_set_alternative_button_order() which has been around since GTK+ 2.6 (sometime 2k4). And with a small change to your .gtkrc file, you can have your cake and eat it too. And you can file bugs against applications that don't use this function with their dialogs and applications that violate the HIG (which is probably a sizable number, but since the people who presumably care about it don't speak up to developers...). I Thanks for the info. I didn't know about that - so this is technically solved (except for bugs). understand Qt has a similar ability for GNOME and Mac OS X support, but I've never had a want or need to look into it so I'm not sure what it is or how to use it. As I have just read, Qt4.2 has introduced a mechanism for platform dependent button ordering (http://www.crossplatform.ru/?q=node/303). So hopefully, other cross platform APIs like Swing, SWT and wxWidgets add a similar function. It's probably not even bad if Windows / Wine ports look non-native ;-). Back to the topic, I think it is even more important that Ubuntu beyound GTK apps would behave consistently (i.e. follow the Gnome HIG as closely as possible) than looking similar to Gnome apps. Kai Schroeder -A.Walton -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
does ubuntu wireless network support ad hoc mode?
-- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Ubuntu beyond GTK apps?
2008/5/16 A. Walton [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 7:49 AM, Kai Schroeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Conrad Knauer wrote: In my opinion Gnome has to change the HIG first. Although I really like the way affirmative actions are described with a verb instead of just OK it was not a good move to place the affirmative action on the right side of a dialog. [snip] Whether or not you agree with it, it's been written in the HIG for years and years, and it's the natural layout for long-time GNOME users (and Mac OS X users for that matter). Changing this at such a late point is just going to trigger an immense amount of frustration (I imagine it'd be like waking up and noticing your mouse axes flipped and your buttons were mapped the opposite direction). So no, the HIG does not need to change in this aspect. Instead, for those who actually care about this (read: pedants, KDE/Windows users), there's gtk_dialog_set_alternative_button_order() I find this pedants, KDE/Windows users interesting. I just gave an old laptop with xubuntu to my 12 year-old niece, she is neither a pedant nor a KDE user nor much of a Windows user. She is going to want to use whatever software works, whether it's kitchscratch, gitchscratch or xitchscratch. She might notice one day that OK keeps changing from left-side to right-side and complain about Linux being a pain or it might just remain a subconscious annoyance, either way, it's a pain. Apart from a fairly small number of developers, documenters and fan-boys, I suspect there are very few conscious KDE users or Gnome users. I certainly am not. I use KDE's window manager and task bar because a long time ago I configured it the way I like. Maybe Gnome can do exactly the same now, I don't care, my grass is too long and my daughter wants to play on the see-saw, I'm not switching desktops this week. The %age of Ubuntu users who you can label as consciously being $WIDGETSET users shrinks as Ubuntu becomes more popular (windows user being the exception) so making any choices or policy based on such labelling does not seem in the interests of the majority of users. If there is a way that the average user can have 1 consistent UI 2 widest choice of applications 3 no need to choose which camp they belong to then that should probably be the default and let those who want to follow the One True Widget Set, twiddle with their .rc files or avoid that program because it begins with the wrong first letter. It seems from the paragraph below that there is a way - there just needs to be a flame war to decide which one to twiddle by default for those who don't care, F which has been around since GTK+ 2.6 (sometime 2k4). And with a small change to your .gtkrc file, you can have your cake and eat it too. And you can file bugs against applications that don't use this function with their dialogs and applications that violate the HIG (which is probably a sizable number, but since the people who presumably care about it don't speak up to developers...). I understand Qt has a similar ability for GNOME and Mac OS X support, but I've never had a want or need to look into it so I'm not sure what it is or how to use it. -A.Walton Kai Schroeder -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Soliciting opinions on #137993
Hi, Please review the ticket: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mplayerplug-in/+bug/137993 The question is whether or not the mplayerplug-in package should Depend on each and every browser package that supports it. The problem with this approach, of course, is that if one such browser is missed (and new browsers *do* get introduced in releases), then the user has to install a browser he doesn't intend to use. In my opinion, the ideal situation is for all Gecko-based browsers to Provide gecko-browser so that plugin packages can depend on that. However, this is not currently in place. Given that, I'd prefer it if plugin packages downgrade this dependency to Recommends. Opinions? Thanks, Forest -- Forest Bond http://www.alittletooquiet.net http://www.pytagsfs.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Soliciting opinions on #137993
Saying that I must install a browser to install mplayer-plugin is like saying you I must install an MP3 player to install an mp3 library. I spotted an argument that it won't be uninstalled when the last browser is uninstalled. How is that handled for libraries? F 2008/5/16 Forest Bond [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi, Please review the ticket: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mplayerplug-in/+bug/137993 The question is whether or not the mplayerplug-in package should Depend on each and every browser package that supports it. The problem with this approach, of course, is that if one such browser is missed (and new browsers *do* get introduced in releases), then the user has to install a browser he doesn't intend to use. In my opinion, the ideal situation is for all Gecko-based browsers to Provide gecko-browser so that plugin packages can depend on that. However, this is not currently in place. Given that, I'd prefer it if plugin packages downgrade this dependency to Recommends. Opinions? Thanks, Forest -- Forest Bond http://www.alittletooquiet.net http://www.pytagsfs.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFILapaRO4fQQdv5AwRApruAJ9HCbvIGZ13P7pKCswU7/D4CgqMzwCfS677 UnE2rSFthRkV5vobhlSFv7c= =OPoA -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Strip incompatible characters from Windows partitions!
On Fri, 2008-05-16 at 08:24 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: FAT is a defacto standard for portable storage devices. Not true anymore, the external disks I have seen that have 300 GB came with NTFS. Anyway, external disks may be a different topic altogether, but what about the Windows system partition that Ubuntu mounts writable by default (IIRC)? -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Strip incompatible characters from Windows partitions!
On Friday 16 May 2008 12:19, Mario Vukelic wrote: On Fri, 2008-05-16 at 08:24 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: FAT is a defacto standard for portable storage devices. Not true anymore, the external disks I have seen that have 300 GB came with NTFS. Anyway, external disks may be a different topic altogether, but what about the Windows system partition that Ubuntu mounts writable by default (IIRC)? OK. So then it's a mistake to assume anything about the target O/S based on they file system type. There was recently some discussion about this on #ubuntu-motu IRC and it seems pretty difficult to actually do this reliably and completely. Scott K -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Strip incompatible characters from Windows partitions!
This e-mail summarises a discussion in #ubuntu-motu between myself, ScottK and persia. I'll first explain the general problem, then suggest a messy solution to a surprisingly messy problem. Most of these ideas are not my own, and in fact had to be explained to me at some length, so please don't assume that I know what I'm talking about ;) Since there wasn't an NTFS expert available during the conversation, it's possible that the following is only true of FAT filesystems. Characters like '' and '/' are in fact just the tip of the iceberg - see https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dosfstools/+bug/49217 for another way that the same problem can bite you. Because there are no proper standards for Windows filesystems, there's no common agreement about how to turn the string of bytes that make up a FAT filename into a string of characters. For example, a Japanese computer might look at a filesystem and assume that all the files are encoded in SHIFT-JIS, while a Western European computer might look at the same filesystem and assume that all the files are encoded in code page 1252. Most irritatingly, FAT filenames can use single-byte encodings (like ASCII), multi-byte (like UTF-8), or double-byte (like UTF-16). This means that a filename might be valid ASCII (perhaps including some disallowed ASCII characters, perhaps not), but which would be garbled nonsense if interpreted as such. The above problems make automatically detecting the character encoding of files in a FAT filesystem at best hard and sometimes impossible. Therefore, there's no general way to tell whether '', '/' etc. are valid characters in a given file in a FAT file. Even if there were a way to work out which characters are allowed, ext2-on-Windows drivers make it possible to have files with disallowed characters in a Windows system. Disallowed characters aren't so much a Windows kernel issue as a pervasive Windows UI issue. The exception that proves the rule is Emacs on Windows. Emacs being Emacs, it pays little attention to the conventions of young upstarts like Microsoft, so can handle files with funnily-named characters just fine. Given the above, my suggestion is that there ought to be a tool that runs identically in Windows and Linux that interactively converts files. It would ask for an initial encoding, target encoding, and target path, then recurse through all the directories rooted in that path, translating files as it goes. Characters that are valid but tend to cause headaches could be automatically converted, or the user could be prompted for a better name. Most of the actual work in this program can be done by iconv, although it might be worth having a punycode mode that minimises incompatibility at the expense of readability. Finally, I would suggest that the Windows version be run straight from the Ubuntu CD, rather than being made available from some website somewhere. As well as making the program a little bit easier to find, it makes a great advert for Linux - it solves the problems that Windows causes. - Andrew -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Ubuntu beyond GTK apps?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 5:33 PM, Fergal Daly wrote: 2008/5/16 A. Walton : On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 7:49 AM, Kai Schroeder wrote: Whether or not you agree with it, it's been written in the HIG for years and years, and it's the natural layout for long-time GNOME users (and Mac OS X users for that matter). Changing this at such a late point is just going to trigger an immense amount of frustration (I imagine it'd be like waking up and noticing your mouse axes flipped and your buttons were mapped the opposite direction). So no, the HIG does not need to change in this aspect. Instead, for those who actually care about this (read: pedants, KDE/Windows users), there's gtk_dialog_set_alternative_button_order() I find this pedants, KDE/Windows users interesting. I just gave an old laptop with xubuntu to my 12 year-old niece, she is neither a pedant nor a KDE user nor much of a Windows user. She is going to want to use whatever software works, whether it's kitchscratch, gitchscratch or xitchscratch. She might notice one day that OK keeps changing from left-side to right-side and complain about Linux being a pain or it might just remain a subconscious annoyance, either way, it's a pain. [snip] It seems from the paragraph below that there is a way - there just needs to be a flame war to decide which one to twiddle by default for those who don't care, That's exactly the problem - no matter what decision is made the half of the users (those more aware who has used linux for years, who should be precious for any distribution as it's them who advocacy for Ubuntu and Linux in general) will be pissed off. I guess it is possible to choose button layout and theme based on the DE that's active. But it still won't be consistent GUI. The difference between KDE and Gnome applications cannot be reduced to the different widgets or button layout. Unless KDE and GNOME developers agree to create common HIG there is no way to create consistent desktop by using K* and G* applications simultaneously. And if someone wonder if consistency is worth all the effort look at the Mac OS X - people use this system among other things because of how does all applications look alike. Also saying that that most people doesn't care about HIG and It only matters for developers and fan boys isn't fair. It means that what developers does has no real value.. F Best Regards, Krzysztof Klimonda -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: http://getfiregpg.org iD8DBQFILe2ars/V4+kvH8sRAknUAJsE4ts/B+IKiCaB6ueodYHcZdJKCgCguCmJ WiwikBaMxaMYK63RhuCZo2E= =2AFY -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Soliciting opinions on #137993
If someone is installing mplayer-plugin (s)he knows what (s)he is doing and will have no problems with it, IMHO, so i think we can not depend on any browser and not crash anything, so i'm ok to moving the browser thing to Recomend:. BUT i have talked to ari (the Debian Maintainer) before and i'm not sure he will be ok with this change, since he has his own opinions, but if we want to have a bigger diff between debian and ubuntu package, i'm ok with it. On Fri, 2008-05-16 at 17:11 +0100, Fergal Daly wrote: Saying that I must install a browser to install mplayer-plugin is like saying you I must install an MP3 player to install an mp3 library. I spotted an argument that it won't be uninstalled when the last browser is uninstalled. How is that handled for libraries? F 2008/5/16 Forest Bond [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi, Please review the ticket: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mplayerplug-in/+bug/137993 The question is whether or not the mplayerplug-in package should Depend on each and every browser package that supports it. The problem with this approach, of course, is that if one such browser is missed (and new browsers *do* get introduced in releases), then the user has to install a browser he doesn't intend to use. In my opinion, the ideal situation is for all Gecko-based browsers to Provide gecko-browser so that plugin packages can depend on that. However, this is not currently in place. Given that, I'd prefer it if plugin packages downgrade this dependency to Recommends. Opinions? Thanks, Forest -- Forest Bond http://www.alittletooquiet.net http://www.pytagsfs.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFILapaRO4fQQdv5AwRApruAJ9HCbvIGZ13P7pKCswU7/D4CgqMzwCfS677 UnE2rSFthRkV5vobhlSFv7c= =OPoA -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss -- aka nxvl Peruvian LoCo Team key fingerprint = 8104 21CE A580 7EB7 5184 8DFF 6A3A D5DA 24DC 6AF5 gpg --keyserver keyserver.ubuntu.com --recv-keys 24DC6AF5 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Ubuntu beyond GTK apps?
2008/5/16 Krzysztof Klimonda [EMAIL PROTECTED]: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 5:33 PM, Fergal Daly wrote: 2008/5/16 A. Walton : It seems from the paragraph below that there is a way - there just needs to be a flame war to decide which one to twiddle by default for those who don't care, That's exactly the problem - no matter what decision is made the half of the users (those more aware who has used linux for years, who should be precious for any distribution as it's them who advocacy for Ubuntu and Linux in general) will be pissed off. If Ubuntu defaulted to a .gtkrc or .kderc that harmonised these buttons, the people who would be angry are the people who know how to fix it already. I guess it is possible to choose button layout and theme based on the DE that's active. But it still won't be consistent GUI. The difference between KDE and Gnome applications cannot be reduced to the different widgets or button layout. Unless KDE and GNOME developers agree to create common HIG there is no way to create consistent desktop by using K* and G* applications simultaneously. And if someone wonder if consistency is worth all the effort look at the Mac OS X - people use this system among other things because of how does all applications look alike. Of course but this particular difference seems to be the most discussed. Also saying that that most people doesn't care about HIG and It only matters for developers and fan boys isn't fair. It means that what developers does has no real value.. That's not what I said. I wasn't talking about the HIG, just talking one particular bit of it, so please don't make out that I said only devs and fanboys care about the HIG. I do think that the world breaks down into 1 people who will only ever use g... or k... and are thus unaffected by this 2 people who want to use the best tool for the job, of which we have 2a people who know how to tweak .rc files to make them both the same 2b people who just want to get on with it and are unable or unwilling to figure out how to fix it or don't even realise there's a fixable problem and just think this linux thing is annoying. I think 2b is probably the majority already and is only growing much faster than the others. What is your argument for not working well for 2b by default. 1 and 2a know how to get what they want and in fact will probably already have their own .rc files and will probably never even see a new default setting, F -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Strip incompatible characters from Windows partitions!
Andrew Sayers andrew-ubuntu-devel at pileofstuff.org writes: Since there wasn't an NTFS expert available during the conversation, NTFS is pretty well known and documented, especially filename handling. Windows also do allow the creation of such filenames but it's not so widely known how to do it. When most Windows applications try to read such filenmes then they get just as confused as if the files were created on Linux (google for Windows SFU). It's also documented at http://ntfs-3g.org/support.html#posixfilenames2 -- Why does the driver allow special characters in the filenames? NTFS supports several filename namespaces at the same time: DOS, Win32 and POSIX. While the NTFS-3G driver handles all of them, it always creates new files in the POSIX namespace for maximum portability and interoperability reasons. This means that filenames are case sensitive and all characters are allowed except '/' and '\0'. This is perfectly legal on Windows, though some application may get confused. If you find so then please report it to the developer of the relevant Windows software. Workaround: If case insensitivity handling and/or restriction of special character usage is desirable then you may export the NTFS volume via Samba which supports this functionality the same way as it does for other POSIX file systems. Status: Not NTFS-3G problem. - Regards, Szaka NTFS-3G: http://ntfs-3g.org -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Ubuntu beyond GTK apps?
On Sat, 17 May 2008 02:08:16 +0100 Fergal Daly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2008/5/16 Krzysztof Klimonda [EMAIL PROTECTED]: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 5:33 PM, Fergal Daly wrote: 2008/5/16 A. Walton : It seems from the paragraph below that there is a way - there just needs to be a flame war to decide which one to twiddle by default for those who don't care, That's exactly the problem - no matter what decision is made the half of the users (those more aware who has used linux for years, who should be precious for any distribution as it's them who advocacy for Ubuntu and Linux in general) will be pissed off. If Ubuntu defaulted to a .gtkrc or .kderc that harmonised these buttons, the people who would be angry are the people who know how to fix it already. I guess it is possible to choose button layout and theme based on the DE that's active. But it still won't be consistent GUI. The difference between KDE and Gnome applications cannot be reduced to the different widgets or button layout. Unless KDE and GNOME developers agree to create common HIG there is no way to create consistent desktop by using K* and G* applications simultaneously. And if someone wonder if consistency is worth all the effort look at the Mac OS X - people use this system among other things because of how does all applications look alike. Of course but this particular difference seems to be the most discussed. Also saying that that most people doesn't care about HIG and It only matters for developers and fan boys isn't fair. It means that what developers does has no real value.. That's not what I said. I wasn't talking about the HIG, just talking one particular bit of it, so please don't make out that I said only devs and fanboys care about the HIG. I do think that the world breaks down into 1 people who will only ever use g... or k... and are thus unaffected by this 2 people who want to use the best tool for the job, of which we have 2a people who know how to tweak .rc files to make them both the same 2b people who just want to get on with it and are unable or unwilling to figure out how to fix it or don't even realise there's a fixable problem and just think this linux thing is annoying. I think 2b is probably the majority already and is only growing much faster than the others. What is your argument for not working well for 2b by default. 1 and 2a know how to get what they want and in fact will probably already have their own .rc files and will probably never even see a new default setting, Yes. By switching to Debian. Seriously, the notion that it's OK to not care about how defaults affect experienced users is totally bogus. I run my Kubuntu desktop with very little customization a really dislike the notion that my preferences don't count because I could turn off some annoying new feature. Scott K -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Ubuntu beyond GTK apps?
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 10:43 PM, Scott Kitterman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Seriously, the notion that it's OK to not care about how defaults affect experienced users is totally bogus. I run my Kubuntu desktop with very little customization a really dislike the notion that my preferences don't count because I could turn off some annoying new feature. Scott K I agree 100%. I try and keep my desktop as close to default as possible because it makes it so much easier to test bugs. The less customization I do, the more likely it is that it isn't my fault somehow. And besides, just because I know how to edit config files doesn't mean I like doing it. Although I'd much rather have everything work the way I want it to out of the box, I realize that sometimes my preferences differ from the norm. I'm fine with that, but if we're going to do something as fundamental as a UI reorganization, we have to be absolutely sure that the majority would benefit from it. Evan -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Ubuntu beyond GTK apps?
I agree 100%. I try and keep my desktop as close to default as possible because it makes it so much easier to test bugs. The less customization I do, the more likely it is that it isn't my fault somehow. And besides, just because I know how to edit config files doesn't mean I like doing it. Although I'd much rather have everything work the way I want it to out of the box, I realize that sometimes my preferences differ from the norm. I'm fine with that, but if we're going to do something as fundamental as a UI reorganization, we have to be absolutely sure that the majority would benefit from it. Evan We're getting off track here, it's obvious that we can't annoy experienced users just because we want to make life easier and simpler for more people. We can however offer serious smart configuration and option GUIs where smarts can't be done. I find it hard to believe that those who install or log on in KDE could not have a different configuration from those that log in via Gnome for both gnome and kde settings for such things as switching buttons around. Anything that doesn't conform to the HIG of gnome or kde in those settings is a bug, it might not be an important one but it _is_ a problem and not a feature. The solutions will be non-obvious and a real pain in the neck sometimes but we can't just dismiss these problems because their too hard or require too much ingenuity to solve. So solutions people? Best Regards, Martin Owens -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
