Hey gang; Some boring comments at the end, as a response:
On Sun, 10 Aug 2008 02:52:30 pm Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
Or to say it other words: The packages be so good as possible and
On Saturday 09 August 2008 20:38:27 Attila wrote: there is nothing what can be done more or better. But for me kde user and fan of the kicker the actual panel is more a joke than something what i want to use.
Could you please elaborate? I am curious to know what is so wrong.
Except for an applet for system activity monitor, I don't miss anything on panel. Although it took over couple of days to get back back to where I was with KDE3.5.9.
I've found a number of little annoying things, like icons you've put on to the menu bars, don't seem to 'stick' once the system is re-started.
Richard
Actually I view KDE as a working environment. So it is not *just* how does kicker less of a useful tool and a fufiling experience to use, but ALL of the items that make up the KDE environment. As such this upgrade has a been a poor experience without much redeeming to speak for itself at this point in time, as there has been significant feature and capability regression when comparing kde3 and kde4 . Yes I am well aware that things may improve to make kde4 not only better but eventually perhaps even a better environment. But it is hardly that now. i.e. Pick just about any of the pieces and try something you use to do. Like printer management, window-shading, auto-updating in the default file-manager (now dolphin,), proper power-system management... NONE of that is working, let alone correctly. Restarting dolphin to see the file changes is just plain sad. And these are just a few of the MANY examples available. So, if someone were to ask me, (*and yes I DO realize that no one is asking me,) I would say that arch would have been better served to have planned for some users wanting to continue to use the older kde instead of the forced upgrade to kde4. Afterall those following the kde4 upgrade KNEW about the severe feature regression BEFORE taking kde4 out of the testing repo. And YEAH, I am also aware of how to prevent this upgrading, but after the fact or sufficient warning was NOT part of the pacman -Syu procedure either that there was a pending major upgrade OR that there was a significant file relocation of key startup files. There was *also* no established procedure for doing a retro-grade (fix), nor even the above mentioned parallel kde3 and 4 inthe extra repo. And all of these *were* items that could have been easily done and *were* predictably needed. Anyways, as a power user of KDE, I now have less of a feature set, *AND* more buggy operation of what is left. IS this a complaint ? Nope, just an observation, and one that is response to those who have been asking for some clarification. Very best regards; Bob Finch Liviu Librescu - În veci pomenirea lui. (May his memory be eternal.)