Stop Microsoft
Operating Systems => Linux and UNIX => Topic started by: voidmain on 6 April 2002, 05:09
-
I just installed KDE 3.0 today and I must say I am very impressed. A lot of things that were very clunky under 2.x have been fixed including fonts, True Type fonts and Antialiasing. And there is even a selection box that allows you to only antialias certain sized fonts. Very nice all around. Initially I would have to say it's at least twice as good as KDE 2.x.
-
hehe... being a newb to linux (and only a dabbler at that) I find myself a bit partial to Gnome. KDE 2.2.2 seemed to lack in the functianality department, tho the included applications were better.
When I first put YDL on my comp, it set the monitor to 8 bit mode and the colors looked horrible, your post concerning screen size in another thread saved me on this so thanx :D , anyway, I'm wondering why a comprehensive control panel hasn't been written yet. Is the goal of KDE to provide a working environment as flexible as OSX? That is, an environment were you can do everything thrugh the GUI or, if your up to it, you can do everything thrugh the terminal.
Or are they just interested in providing a sort of front end to get common power user tasks out of the way?
I think both KDE and GNOME have a long way to go before they become fully functional desktop GUI's for the masses, and indeed, for the user. however the progress does seem promessing. I hope they do it, heck maybe Ill read up some more and try to contribute.
Just some thoughts.
EDIT:
HEHE, just checked out the screens on their site. I think their goals are clear as they show off KDE functioning OSX-like Windows-like and Be-Like. (http://smile.gif)
[ April 05, 2002: Message edited by: psyjax ]
-
More configuration can be done through the KDE control center than before. Personally though, I don't care if there is a GUI way to do every single task, there may be as far as I know, I will still use command line. It seems to be faster than 2.x.x and fonts are better, and things look much cleaner and nicer in my opinion. Up until installing 3.0 today I was using the OSX theme. I'm giving the default KDE theme a try for a while. For some reason I just don't care for gnome, never have. But I can work in any of the window managers. I used to really like Enlightenment but I've been using KDE primarily for a time now, basically because I do a lot of work with Windows engineers and for them I like to show them how much like Windows Linux can be hoping to get more of them to give it a shot.
-
i dont care for gnome either. I have used linux in few numbers, but when i have used it, i preferred KDE every time. I accidentally installed gnome at install and cant figure out where to uninstall, i tried the thing under KDE (kpackage), i it couldnt find the dependancies for gnome, even if i told it not to check for dependencies. Where/how do i uninstall it?
I should get KDE 3.0, it sounds great.
-
quote:
Originally posted by VoidMain:
...And there is even a selection box that allows you to only antialias certain sized fonts.
Can you do me a favor please.. does that selection box only change what's in the XftConfig file? I've tried modifying that already and mozilla still won't listen to it.
If it doesn't, then maybe I'll consider compiling it.. argh the Debian packages arent out yet..
-
I always uninstall at the command line using "rpm". First do an "rpm -qa | grep gnome" then "rpm -e <packagename>". If a package depends on something else it will tell you, remove the dependent packages first. P.S. I am *really* liking this KDE 3.0. Hopefully you have broadband. I downloaded and installed all 206MB of it. First I shut X down, uninstalled all of my KDE 2.2.2 then did an "rpm -Uvh *.rpm" in the directory where I downloaded everything. This was on a RedHat 7.2 Laptop. Also before logging in for the first time I renamed all of the key config directories under my home directory so I could get a fresh 3.0 desktop. (rename ~/.kde, ~/.kde2, ~/Desktop, ~/.kpackage, ~/.kdevelop, ~/.qt, ~/.kderc, and you might have a couple of more). Everything worked perfectly after starting up except for the KDE Help Center. I figured out that I needed to upgrade "libxslt". Grabbed that RPM from www.rpmfind.net (http://www.rpmfind.net)
Good luck! It's worth it! Or you could wait for the next RedHat/Mandrake/SuSe release which will surely come with 3.0 on the CD. So far I would say it's well worth downloading if you have high speed.
-
quote:
Originally posted by asdf:
Can you do me a favor please.. does that selection box only change what's in the XftConfig file? I've tried modifying that already and mozilla still won't listen to it.
If it doesn't, then maybe I'll consider compiling it.. argh the Debian packages arent out yet..
It appears to be a graphical configuration for XftConfig, although you can select a different file to configure XftConfig is the default. There are many options. Having said that I just fired up Mozilla (Build ID: 2001090111) and the fonts appear to me to be antialiased. All the fonts look good to me (actually better than Konqueror which I think is much improved over the 2.2 version). I would hate for you to have to download and compile the source and not have it work the way you want though. Maybe at least wait for the deb packages..
-
quote:
P.S. I am *really* liking this KDE 3.0. Hopefully you have broadband. I downloaded and installed all 206MB of it. First I shut X down, uninstalled all of my KDE 2.2.2 then did an "rpm -Uvh *.rpm" in the directory where I downloaded everything. This was on a RedHat 7.2 Laptop. Also before logging in for the first time I renamed all of the key config directories under my home directory so I could get a fresh 3.0 desktop. (rename ~/.kde, ~/.kde2, ~/Desktop, ~/.kpackage, ~/.kdevelop, ~/.qt, ~/.kderc, and you might have a couple of more). Everything worked perfectly after starting up except for the KDE Help Center. I figured out that I needed to upgrade "libxslt". Grabbed that RPM from www.rpmfind.net (http://www.rpmfind.net)
of course i have broadband. You're talking to the guy who downloaded 3 GB of linux (all of redhat and mandrake).
If i download KDE from ftp://ibiblio.org/pub/packages/desktops/kde/stable/3.0/Red%20Hat/i386 (http://ftp://ibiblio.org/pub/packages/desktops/kde/stable/3.0/Red%20Hat/i386) does that mean i have to dl all (or most) of those RPMs???
-
I downloaded all of them except for the kde-i18n* files (lang files). I got them from http://download.au.kde.org/pub/kde/stable/3.0/Red%20Hat/i386/ (http://download.au.kde.org/pub/kde/stable/3.0/Red%20Hat/i386/) and it was a pretty fast download (of course these are the RedHat binaries, other distros are there as well). "wget" with the right options will pull just what you want in a single command.
[ April 06, 2002: Message edited by: VoidMain ]
-
What did I do wrong?
i went into the ftp command line thing (in the konsole)and tried to open ftp://ftpserver (http://ftp://ftpserver) (i tried a few different ftp servers). with each server i tried it would say "name or service unknown"
quote:
posted by woidmain:
I downloaded all of them except for the kde-i18n* files (lang files). I got them from http://download.au.kde.org/pub/kde/stable/3.0/Red%20Hat/i386/ (http://download.au.kde.org/pub/kde/stable/3.0/Red%20Hat/i386/) and it was a pretty fast download (of course these are the RedHat binaries, other distros are there as well). "wget" with the right options will pull just what you want in a single command.
do you mean "ftp://download.au.kde.org/pub/kde/stable/3.0/Red%20Hat/i386/
and i use "mget" dont i?
-
I have a 24k connection, so there's no way I'm downloading KDE 3.0 yet ;) I'll wait until SuSE 8.0 comes out later this month. From what some of you are saying, however, it sounds like it is quite good. I thought KDE 2.x had plenty of features for me but what it needed was a speed boost, (Konqueror start-up, in particular) better font support, and more GUI config tools. And perhaps a more mature version of KOffice. Hopefully KDE 3 addresses some of my complaints, and it sounds like it does.
PS I really like that about being able to choose what fonts to do AA on KDE 3. Very cool indeed!
-
quote:
Originally posted by Master of Reality:
do you mean "ftp://download.au.kde.org/pub/kde/stable/3.0/Red%20Hat/i386/
and i use "mget" dont i?
No, I meant exactly what I said. "wget" and "http". "wget" is a separate utility that you may not have installed. "wget" can download via http or ftp URLs. It's *not* an FTP client. But you can certainly use "ncftp" or "ncftpget" would be a similar way to download as "wget" but limited to ftp URLs only. You probably have "wget" on your installation CD but didn't install it. I find "http" URLs are usually much faster than FTP.
-
how do i use wget to dl multiple files?? i looked throughout the MAN pages, but couldnt find anything about dling multiple http files.
Do you think it would be worth... anything, to install "Linux V1."?
if it was ftp i could just put "*.rpm" at the end of the URL, But HTTP:// doesnt support wildcards, even if i turn globbing on.
[ April 07, 2002: Message edited by: Master of Reality ]
[ April 07, 2002: Message edited by: Master of Reality ]
-
jeez, woidmain, your right, this ftp server only runs at 150 kb/s. lol (that http site only downloaded at about 37.5 kb/s for me)
i got it to work using that ftp site. ;)
hmmm, i probly shouldnt have downloaded it in all the languages, aww, it only took a few seconds. :cool:
[ April 07, 2002: Message edited by: Master of Reality ]
[ April 07, 2002: Message edited by: Master of Reality ]
-
I said "usually". It obviously depends on the load of the server at the time. Usually limits are put on FTP servers that are not on web/httpd servers.
-
I just installed KDE 3.0 on my FreeBSD Desktop, and boy oh boy I'm loving it. ( so far, it's been about 15 minutes ) Lol.
Also, I'd suggest you get a binary distribution if you could... having previously compiled KDE, it takes _HOURS_, even on my Athlon Thunderbird 950MHz. Not that I'm saying my proc is the fastest in the world, but it's fairly decent.
I also prefer KDE over Gnome, but seeing as Sun will be shipping Gnome 2.0 as it's default windows environment when it comes out, I might want to check it out.
Good day to you all,
Mike
-
Sun never did have a taste for a good desktop environment in my opinion. I never liked OpenWindows and I don't like CDE. I guess they're keeping up the tradition by putting on another window manager that I don't like. Oh well, they make money off of their equipment that has no need for a window manager running. I use a lot of Sun equipment but I prefer Linux on i386 with KDE or Enlightenment, or WindowMaker for my desktop. KDE 3.0 looks like it will be the choice for a while now. I've got 3 days on it now and I love it. Much better than 2.x. Things are faster, cleaner and more functionality.
[ April 08, 2002: Message edited by: VoidMain ]
-
i'm stuck with versions of KDE, GNOME, Enlightenment et cetera from last year :( if not the year before in some cases...
not long now though, before i get the red hat 7.2 CDs (apparently mandrake 8.2 beta is possibly full of bugs according to mandrakesoft SA, so i might steer clear of it)
Hey, i tried to use kfm in GNOME, and it was not liking it at all, any idea of a window manager that can run in both KDE and GNOME? i suppose enlightenment does it, but i will never use half the flashy stuff in enlightenment, so i'd like to save my CPU some unnecessary turnover...
Just idle gossip, don't feel like you must answer my questions, all that is going to happen is i'll get red hat 7.2, and then i'll hunt down the latest window managers to try and get one i like.
Does the newest enlightenment come with red hat btw?
-
i cant get KDE 3 to install.
How do i uninstall KDE 2 fully? I think i did "rpm -qa | grep KDE" and then "rpm -e" to each of the rpms listed, and their dependencies, but when i tried to install KDE 3 it said it has or needs a list of dependencies.
I tried isntalling red hat 7.2 without KDE or gnome, and when i downloaded kde 3 (from my ftp site that got a max of according to wget 6.98 Mb/s), and ran "rpm -Uvf *.rpm" in the directory i dled it to, it said that it has or needs a list dependencies or something.
Now re-installed Red Hat again (i need to majorly change where all the partions were, to get rid of windows this time) with KDE 2.X.
[ April 08, 2002: Message edited by: Master of Reality ]
-
There will be a couple of non-critical dependencies after you remove all the kde2 stuff. (X11/Cards, and a couple more). Once you get it to the point where you have kde removed you can change into the directory you downloaded kde3 and type:
rpm -Uvh *.rpm --nodeps --force
Worked for me on several machines already.
-
quote:
Originally posted by X11:
I still think Ximian GNOME RULES.
I installed Ximian Gnome the same time I isntalled Ximian Evolution. While I love Evolution, I still do not like Gnome. But that's why there are many window managers. Everyone can be happy.
-
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
i now have KDE 3.0 on my comp!!!!!
i see many little differences in the first 42 seconds i have been on, but suspect there is numerous changes.
(http://smile.gif) (http://smile.gif) (http://smile.gif) (http://smile.gif) :D :D :cool: ;)
-
Master, if you haven't already tried out all the styles the combo I find most pleasing to this point is:
In KDE Control Center:
Style: Kerimak (Enable GUI effects, Translucent/Software Blend, Show ICONS on buttons)
Window Decoration: Glow
Icons: KDE Hi-Color Size: 32
Panel: Tiny, autohide, fast
Background: Walpaper/Scaled/only_k.jpg
System->LoginManager->Background: Walpaper/Scaled/kubical.jpg
And X set up at 1280x1024/32bit on a 19" monitor.
Just some things to play with. Let me know what you find interesting.
-
quote:
Originally posted by VoidMain:
Master, if you haven't already tried out all the styles the combo I find most pleasing to this point is:
In KDE Control Center:
Style: Kerimak (Enable GUI effects, Translucent/Software Blend, Show ICONS on buttons)
Window Decoration: Glow
Icons: KDE Hi-Color Size: 32
Panel: Tiny, autohide, fast
Background: Walpaper/Scaled/only_k.jpg
System->LoginManager->Background: Walpaper/Scaled/kubical.jpg
And X set up at 1280x1024/32bit on a 19" monitor.
Just some things to play with. Let me know what you find interesting.
sweet.
I'm using "slick" icons.
It runs a bit slow (well... not extremely fast), but that should all change April 20 when i plan to buy a new board, processor, sound, box, at a computer show in toronto.
I currently have a pentium MMX 233MHZ on an old board, with a 14" monitor 1024X768 24bit, with a starfighter PCI video card.
ps.
does "wget" really output correct dl speeds? A couple times throughout my download it claimed i got 6.98 Mb/s and my ISP say i can only get a max of 3Mb/s. Although i do beleive it when it said i was getting between 150 and 940 kb/s from that ftp server, must be a fast connection (perhaps close to my location).check out thess screenshots (http://www.angelfire.com/ri2/42/images/)
[ April 09, 2002: Message edited by: Master of Reality ]
[ April 09, 2002: Message edited by: Master of Reality ]
-
Slow? I haven't noticed anything slow with it yet of course the Laptop I use most of the time is an 800Mhz w/512MB RAM and my desktop is an Athalon 1600 w/512MB RAM and a Geforce3. I suppose some of the effects could eat up CPU and can be turned off if they seem sluggish.
As far as wget speed reporting I can't imagine that it would not be accurate. I mean figuring download speed isn't exactly rocket science. Although there are many reasons that some files could transfer very fast. For instance, if your provider (or you) use a caching proxy server and your files were cached, wget would pull them from the local proxy rather than downloading from the other side of the internet again. Another advantage of using http over ftp. Calculate it yourself using the "time" command:
time wget http://www.somewhere.com/downloads/largefile (http://www.somewhere.com/downloads/largefile)
You should get a timing report back, divide the "real" number into the size of the file and you will have your answer. Also make sure you realize whether you are working with bits(b)/bytes(B)/kilobits(Kb)/kilobytes(KB)/megabit(Mb)/megabyte(MB) and convert to common units when comparing with other file transfer methods.
Of course to be really accurate you would have to subtract the amount of time it takes for wget to connect and disconnect from the server but for large files this would be insignificant.
[ April 09, 2002: Message edited by: VoidMain ]
-
there are some great links here!
That one from Master of Reality was a bit confusing, an angelfire page telling me that you couldn't externally link to that page, but VoidMain's one was great! click it and see what i mean!
"somewhere.com" indeed!
-
quote:
Originally posted by Calum:
there are some great links here!
That one from Master of Reality was a bit confusing, an angelfire page telling me that you couldn't externally link to that page, but VoidMain's one was great! click it and see what i mean!
"somewhere.com" indeed!
I fixed it. It now goes to my "screenshots" page, where you can go to a few different screenshots i took, and not just linking to the picture.
Go there NOW!!!
www.angelfire.com/ri2/42/images/ (http://www.angelfire.com/ri2/42/images/)
-
how do i either configure my proxy to allow FTP, currently when i try any FTP sites i cant download anything because of my proxy server.
Or how do i use wget to download multiple files from HTTP sites, as you cannot use wildcards (eg. *.rpm) with HTTP.
-
quote:
Originally posted by Master of Reality:
how do i either configure my proxy to allow FTP, currently when i try any FTP sites i cant download anything because of my proxy server.
Or how do i use wget to download multiple files from HTTP sites, as you cannot use wildcards (eg. *.rpm) with HTTP.
You're masquerading correct? Why run FTP through your proxy? I only use the proxy for HTTP traffic. I let FTP through my firewall, only block HTTP. In your browser set it to only use the proxy for HTTP settings. Or if you really do want to use Squid to proxy FTP you can do that as well. One advantage of proxying your FTP is that it will cache your FTP downloads so if you click on a link to download a file via FTP on one machine and go to another machine and click on the same link it will pull the file from your local proxy cache (VERY fast mind you). As far as how to configure it, I don't recall having to change anything from the default squid.conf settings. You might want to change the "ftp_user" tag to something like "ftp_user [email protected]" which is what squid will use as the login password for an anonymous login on your behalf.
One helpful thing to do when things aren't working the way you think they should is to look at the logs. Do a "tail -20" on each of the log files (they can get quite large so I wouldn't load them in an editor). e.g. "tail -20 /var/log/squid/access.log".
-
quote:
Originally posted by VoidMain:
You're masquerading correct? Why run FTP through your proxy? I only use the proxy for HTTP traffic. I let FTP through my firewall, only block HTTP. In your browser set it to only use the proxy for HTTP settings. Or if you really do want to use Squid to proxy FTP you can do that as well. One advantage of proxying your FTP is that it will cache your FTP downloads so if you click on a link to download a file via FTP on one machine and go to another machine and click on the same link it will pull the file from your local proxy cache (VERY fast mind you). As far as how to configure it, I don't recall having to change anything from the default squid.conf settings. You might want to change the "ftp_user" tag to something like "ftp_user [email protected]" which is what squid will use as the login password for an anonymous login on your behalf.
One helpful thing to do when things aren't working the way you think they should is to look at the logs. Do a "tail -20" on each of the log files (they can get quite large so I wouldn't load them in an editor). e.g. "tail -20 /var/log/squid/access.log".
how do i not use a proxy with wget, isnt it "wget --proxy=off".
Maybe its not my proxy that is blocking it.
here is the message i get when i try to download something using wget from FTP:
It says this with every FTP site i go to.
-
wget would not use a proxy unless you configured it to use one in ~/.wgetrc or specified one on the command line. It's most likely a configuration issue on your firewall. What does your ipchains rules look like on your firewall/masq box? "/sbin/ipchains -L".
Also on my machines I have a kernel module loaded called "ip_masq_ftp" which I load in my firewall script with the command: "/sbin/modprobe ip_masq_ftp" Note however that I am running an older version of RedHat on my firewall box (base system is RedHat 6.1 with security updates). I notice on my RH7.2 box these modules do not exist, however there is one called "ip_nat_ftp". Without doing any research to see how ipchains has evolved away from "ip_masq_ftp" I would try loading that module and see if your ftp's start working by typing "/sbin/modprobe ip_nat_ftp" on your firewall machine. Then of course I would search the net for documentation on this weather it works or not.
[ May 05, 2002: Message edited by: VoidMain ]
-
kde 3.0.1 has been released!! http://dot.kde.org/1022133733/ (http://dot.kde.org/1022133733/)