10.04rc: the bottom of installer window is cutting the messages
-- 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
10.04rc: missing tree command
Hello, I think the useful tree tiny command should be installed by default (no dependency, 98kB). Regards. -- 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
lucid beta 2 : too long sleep delay of the screen by default
Hello, The default sleep delay of the screen is set to 30 minutes when operating on mains. I think it is too long because : - Nowadays are the screens using mostly the lcd/led technology with fast resume. - The cost of the energy will increase in the coming years (what ever the primary source is). I think this default delay could be decreased to 10 or 15 minutes. For the few remaining CRT screens, only a few users would have to set their preferences. Regards. -- 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: lucid beta 2 : too long sleep delay of the screen by default
I don't even know the number of users in the different countries around the world, but I don't think all of them have lcd's. I mean that there is now a low ratio of CRT among the screens. I think the users which have a CRT don't have cheap electricity/power at the same time and would also benefit from a reasonable delay of 15 or 20 minutes. Regards. -- 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: too long sleep delay of the screen by default
Nowadays are the screens mostly lcd/led with fast resume. Maybe a good tradeoff would be 20 minutes (it is currently 30 minutes on lucid beta2). For the few remaining CRT screens, the tweak of the preferences would impact only a few users. Erik Andersen a écrit : (reply bottom posted) On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 10:17, Jérôme Bouat jerome.bo...@wanadoo.fr wrote: Hello, I think the default sleep delay of the screen is too long when operating on mains (30 minutes). The cost of the energy will increase in the coming years (what ever the primary source is). I think this default delay could be decreased to 10 minutes. Regards. -- 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 I'm happy with the default where it is. I would like to point out that some screens take a while to turn on after going to sleep. Regards, Erik Andersen -- 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
too long sleep delay of the screen by default
Hello, I think the default sleep delay of the screen is too long when operating on mains (30 minutes). The cost of the energy will increase in the coming years (what ever the primary source is). I think this default delay could be decreased to 10 minutes. Regards. -- 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: 2 panels waste the height needed for web browsing on 16/10 screens
Maybe it is good that the panels hide automatically when a window maximize, just like cairo-dock. I think that seeing the panels always is a cognitive feature. I appreciate to see always the windows list. Moreover, think about senior people which could search the hidden panels for many minutes. Bill Lee a écrit : Dmitrijs Ledkovs 写道: On 2 April 2010 15:17, Felix Miata mrma...@earthlink.net wrote: On 2010/04/02 14:01 (GMT+0200) Jérôme Bouat composed: Maybe only 1 panel which includes the windows bar (like the Microsoft Windows task bar) would be a good trade-off. Kubuntu - one bar Xubuntu - one bar Ubuntu - one bar (netbook remix) Ubuntu - two bar (desktop edition) Maybe it is good that the panels hide automatically when a window maximize, just like cairo-dock. -- 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
missing Trash shortcut into shortcuts menu of the top panel
Hello, In order to save space in height, I customized my desktop by using only 1 panel which merge the 2 defaults panels. However merging the 2 default panels consumes space in width (the windows list bar is tight). Therefore I think we should add a Trash shortcut into the shortcuts menu of the panel in order to allow the user to remove the Trash applet. Please give the user the choice of his/her desktop customization. Regards. -- 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: missing Trash shortcut into shortcuts menu of the top panel
This dockbarx is more difficult to use for senior people. I would like a Trash shortcut into the shortcuts menu in order to keep the design clear und easily understandable. Kjell Le a écrit : Try out dockbarx if you have space problems. http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/DockbarX?content=101604 . On 4 April 2010 15:00, Jérôme Bouat jerome.bo...@wanadoo.fr wrote: Hello, In order to save space in height, I customized my desktop by using only 1 panel which merge the 2 defaults panels. However merging the 2 default panels consumes space in width (the windows list bar is tight). Therefore I think we should add a Trash shortcut into the shortcuts menu of the panel in order to allow the user to remove the Trash applet. Please give the user the choice of his/her desktop customization. Regards. -- 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: missing Trash shortcut into shortcuts menu of the top panel
You ask the developers to give the user the choice of his/her desktop customization. You have that choice, as demonstrated by your own Currently not because I have to open my personnal folder, next I'm searching where to open the trash. It isn't currently easy. I would like a Trash shortcut into the Shortcuts menu. I think the Trash shortcut should be the minimum feature before adding a Downloads folder, etc. -- 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: missing Trash shortcut into shortcuts menu of the top panel
Well the easiest way I guess is to buy a bigger monitor. Not on a 12 inches laptop on which I DO NOT want to install the netbook flavor of Ubuntu. Kjell Le a écrit : Well the easiest way I guess is to buy a bigger monitor. On 4 April 2010 20:41, Erik Andersen erik.b.ander...@gmail.com wrote: (reply bottom posted) On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 07:23, Jérôme Bouat jerome.bo...@wanadoo.fr wrote: You ask the developers to give the user the choice of his/her desktop customization. You have that choice, as demonstrated by your own Currently not because I have to open my personnal folder, next I'm searching where to open the trash. It isn't currently easy. I would like a Trash shortcut into the Shortcuts menu. I think the Trash shortcut should be the minimum feature before adding a Downloads folder, etc. -- I'm quite sure what 'Shortcuts' menu you are talking about, but I'm guessing you are talking about the Places menu? Anyway, it works just fine for me to go to the trash in nautilus and then click Bookmarks Add Bookmark. Doing that adds a Trash shortcut to the places menu. So I would say you have a way to do what you want. As far as the defaults, I personally think they are just fine the way they are and are well thought out. --Erik Andersen -- 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: 2 panels waste the height needed for web browsing on 16/10 screens
Ubuntu - two bar (desktop edition) The issue is that small screens are now shipped high performance laptop (~1000 €). On those high performance laptops, I would not use the netbook remix flavor but the genuine flavor of Ubuntu. Dmitrijs Ledkovs a écrit : On 2 April 2010 15:17, Felix Miata mrma...@earthlink.net wrote: On 2010/04/02 14:01 (GMT+0200) Jérôme Bouat composed: Maybe only 1 panel which includes the windows bar (like the Microsoft Windows task bar) would be a good trade-off. Kubuntu - one bar Xubuntu - one bar Ubuntu - one bar (netbook remix) Ubuntu - two bar (desktop edition) -- 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
popularity contest (ana)cron script should run once a week instead of once a day
Hello, I think the popularity contest cron script should run on a weekly basis instead of a daily basis. I think this high frequency infers an useless additionnal load for all the Ubuntu boxes. In the production world, I think the package selection is unlikely to change each day (even each week). Regards. -- 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
too many virtual terminals by defaut
Hello, I think that only 2 virtual terminals instead of 6 would be enough. I understand that most of the memory of the virtual terminals is shared. However, it would decrease the number of processes (more human readable process list, less processes context switch, ...). There is no small enhancement. Regards. -- 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: too many virtual terminals by defaut
On one side, if you want to use many virtual terminals, then it means that you have enough skills to configure additionnal terminals. On the other side, if you are a newbie, you will possibly never use a virtual terminal. Thus I think the default configuration should provide only 2 virtual terminals. With default configuration (except evolution removed) : --- j...@j-d:~$ ps ax|wc -l 123 j...@j-d:~$ --- If we delete 4 unused processes, we decreases the number of processes by 3%. Regards. Brandon Kuczenski a écrit : Dear Mr. President. There are too many states nowadays. Please eliminate three. I am not a crackpot! http://www.snpp.com/episodes/9F16.html Why in the name of all that is good? My process list features 7 gettys, it's true, but they're utterly insignificant compared to the 194 other processes that come out of 'ps aux'. This includes over 60 system processes (denoted with square brackets). If you're worried about 'human readable' process lists, why not start with those? Moreover, some people actually use multiple consoles. For me, what you propose would be quite different from an 'enhancement.' IANAD, but it seems like you're inventing a problem that doesn't exist, then proposing something mildly offensive to fix it. -Brandon Jérôme Bouat wrote: Hello, I think that only 2 virtual terminals instead of 6 would be enough. I understand that most of the memory of the virtual terminals is shared. However, it would decrease the number of processes (more human readable process list, less processes context switch, ...). There is no small enhancement. Regards. -- 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: too many virtual terminals by defaut
What about the system startup duration impact ? Max Bowsher a écrit : Jérôme Bouat wrote: Hello, I think that only 2 virtual terminals instead of 6 would be enough. I understand that most of the memory of the virtual terminals is shared. However, it would decrease the number of processes (more human readable process list, less processes context switch, ...). There is no small enhancement. Jerome, A decrease of 4 processes would have negligible effect on the overall system process list. An idle process should have negligible context switch overhead. Thus your proposal seems to me to have no advantages, yet would disadvantage people who actually use multiple VTs and would depart needlessly from standards/tradition. Max. -- 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
[lucid beta 1] default screen poweroff delay too long on mains
Hello, I just tested the lucid beta 1 with all updates and I noticed that the default poweroff delay when operating on mains is 30 minutes. I think it could be decreased (up to 10 minutes ?) in order to spare energy and thus : - keep the room cool - recharge the laptop battery faster - save money - avoid energy production drawbacks Regards. -- 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
default screen-saver : why not energy efficient ?
Hello, Because: - the cost of the energy will increase in the coming years (what ever the primary source is) - a laptop needs to spare its battery I think that Ubuntu should set the blank screen as default screensaver for all its flavour (Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu, Ubuntu netbook edition, ...). Could we possibly apply this default configuration before the next LTS release ? Since there will be a lot of users, it would save a lot of energy. Each step can make the world better. Regards. -- 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: Subject: default screen-saver : why not energy efficient ?
Hello, This is a good idea, however it will not save nearly as much energy as keeping the OS small and efficient Each detail has a side effect and may make the system better. For example, if a bicycle competitor knows that lycra shoe cover will save 1/1000 of his power. He will wear those shoe covers because it will maybe save up to 1/10 of his power when it is added to many other tiny tweaks. Regards. -- 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
shorter screen sleep delay ?
Hello, Currently, the default screen sleep delay is 30 minutes when operating on mains. I think it could be decreased to 10 minutes because the cost of the energy will increase in the coming years (what ever the primary source is). -- 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
why the default screensaver isn't blank ?
I think that Ubuntu should set the blank screen as default screensaver because : - the cost of the energy will increase in the coming years (what ever the primary source is) - a laptop needs to spare its battery -- 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
