tde-devels

devels@trinitydesktop.org

3 participants
3808 discussions

Re: [trinity-devel] Compiling kbfx
by Darrell Anderson 10 May '13

10 May '13

>I build it for Debian/Ubuntu on the build farm, and it seems to be >building fine for me. Do you build with -DBUILD_ALL=ON? Looks like you build with that option OFF: http://git.trinitydesktop.org/cgit/tde- packaging/tree/ubuntu/raring/applications/kbfx/debian/rules The default is OFF, which means -DBUILD_DOC=OFF and - DBUILD_TRANSLATIONS=OFF. When either -DBUILD_DOC=ON or - DBUILD_TRANSLATIONS=ON the build fails. Darrell

1 0

Compiling kbfx
by Darrell Anderson 10 May '13

10 May '13

Is anybody building kbfx? I don't use the app but there are several build isssues as noted in bug report 1065. I'd like to build the app just to help the project. Darrell

2 1

Re: [trinity-devel] Formatting removable devices within Trinity
by Darrell Anderson 09 May '13

09 May '13

>On modern systems with udisks and polkit it's easy to implement. Enhancement request 1503 created. Darrell

1 0

Re: [trinity-devel] Formatting removable devices within Trinity
by Darrell Anderson 09 May '13

09 May '13

>Sounds like a good idea. Probably the best way to do this is to add >support to the TDE hardware library, then add a Format button and >associated dialog to both the TDE hardware manager and the removable >device Properties dialog. The Format dialog should, at minimum: >1.) Provide a drop-down list with all supported file systems >2.) Ask at least once before actually executing the format >3.) Allow the user to gain root privileges with tdesudo > >This sounds like a good enhancement bug report. :-) Seems so odd that such a basic feature is not included. Seems silly to have to revert to the command line or gparted to perform such a basic function. Traditionally formatting has been a super user function, but with removable devices that should be a user function. Not to disregard tradition, we probably should ensure no Format menu options appear for fixed devices. Or mounted devices. :- ) I'll write the request. Darrell

2 1

Formatting removable devices within Trinity
by Darrell Anderson 09 May '13

09 May '13

All, Other than the kfloppy tool, does Trinity provide support for formatting removable devices? Is this something Trinity should do? Can kfloppy be expanded for such support? Darrell

2 1

Re: [trinity-devel] Superkaramba widgets
by Darrell Anderson 09 May '13

09 May '13

On Mon, 06 May 2013 15:18:17 -0500 "Darrell Anderson" <darrella(a)hushmail.com> wrote: >We received an enhancement request to add some superkaramba >widgets >prepackaged as part of Trinity: > >http://bugs.pearsoncomputing.net/show_bug.cgi?id=1487 > >A primary advantage for prepackaging is ease-of-use for end-users. > >* Should we do this? > >* If we do this, do we package the widgets separately or merge >them >into the superkaramba sources in tdeutils? > >* If we do this, what guidelines do we establish for selecting >which widget candidates to prepackage and support? > >* As there are many such widgets, even for KDE3, should we instead > >host a wiki page for installing widgets, such as from kde- >look.org? >Seems many of the older KDE3 widgets still function in Trinity. In > >addition to generic instructions, a wiki page could include tips >for cleaning or massaging problematic widgets to work with >Trinity. > >Comments and suggestions appreciated! :-) No opinions? Darrell

3 2

cryptsetup dependency in tdebase-tdeio-plugins-trinity
by Slávek Banko 08 May '13

08 May '13

Tim, I have a proposal for tdebase-tdeio-plugins-trinity to move package cryptsetup from Depends to Recommends. If the user already uses cryptsetup, has already cryptsetup package installed. If does not uses cryptsetup, will not be forced to install it. What do you think? Slavek --

1 0

R14, tdelibs-trinity
by Greg Madden 07 May '13

07 May '13

Wheezy, TDE R-14 For a couple of days now: The following packages have unmet dependencies: tdelibs-trinity : Depends: tdelibs4c2a-trinity (>= 4:14.0.0-r823-0debian7.0.0+pr48) but 4:14.0.0-r822-0debian7.0.0+pr48 is to be installed E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages. -- Peace, Greg

3 3

Re: [trinity-devel] 3.5.13.2
by Darrell Anderson 07 May '13

07 May '13

>Bugs that I would like to have resolved: > >1291 some kickoff menu bugs > => patches look good, I'll push them soon >1424 kdegraphics-kfile-plugins-trinity: add ghostscript as >recommended package > => simple packaging issue >1488 kmix: Adjusting the volume (mono) microphone does not work > => I plan to examine this on Wednesday >1493 kio_man does not support XZ compressed manpages > => patch waiting for test > >Less important: > >1146 Build issue: fusion-icon does not install python module in >python_sitelib >1188 Build issue: tde-guidance can not work > => only when I'll find time to try the solutions proposed by >François > >Besides, I need to include and update Debian / Ubuntu metapackages >for >v3.5.13-sru branch. > >I also plan to backport latest patches "Cleanup output clutter." >:) > >Any other suggestions? I don't have a dog in the fight. I am curious after having a discussion with another person about R14. The "priority" bug list for R14 is growing smaller. Originally we targeted an R14 release in late May, although I don't know whether that remains tenable. I am thinking that releasing 3.5.13.2 after R14 might seem a tad awkward, although hardly strange. Conversely, releasing R14 real soon after announcing 3.5.13.2 might seem a tad odd from a public relations perspective. I don't think 3.5.13.2 will ever be "perfect." In any project a "go live" moment is necessary. There always will be unresolved bugs in any large project. Theoretically, patches could be backported to 3.5.13.2 for years, but I suspect none of us want that and prefer to see 3.5.13.2 as the last of that branch. Even the KDE folks don't try to cram as many bug patches as possible into each point release. They stick to their monthly schedule. Seems the sooner we officially release 3.5.13.2 the sooner we get 3.5.13.x behind us and focus energies on R14. That all said, your list looks short and you wrote that patches already exist for some of them. I'm just chattering out loud --- you do what you think best. :-) Darrell

1 0

Re: [trinity-devel] Cleanup output clutter
by Darrell Anderson 06 May '13

06 May '13

>Inspected, I think it looks good :) >Thank you for your efforts. Are you going to push them to GIT or am I? Darrell

2 1

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

tde-devels