[arch-general] Anyway to revert back to KDE 3.5.9? (Don't Panic)
Some days ago I ran the updates for my Don't Panic install, which said that KDE 3.5.9 was being upgraded to KDE4. I let this go ahead having asked on the list if there were likely to be any problems with KDE4. I also have recently installed Fedora 9 which comes with KDE4 as default, so this is not a pop at Archlinux, but more with KDE4, which I'm finding is virtually unuseable. I'm posting this from Fedora Core 2, which has KDE 3.2.2-14.FC2.2.legacy Red Hat, and apart from the odd konqueror crash when accessing certain web sites, there are no problems. KDE4 is a whole different ball game. The question is, is it possible to somehow revert back to KDE 3.5.9 without reinstalling. Reinstalling would mean that I only have the package versions that were on the install cd. I do have another instance of Dont Panic, that hasn't been upgraded to KDE4, and all the updates prior to the upgrade to KDE4 are available, and looking at /var/cache/pacman/pkg there don't appear to be any KDE updates until the transition to KDE4. If I do have to reinstall this instance of Don't Panic that has been upgraded to KDE4, is there some way to prevent the upgrade to KDE4 on the fresh install? Apologies if I'm offending anyone that loves KDE4, but I'm finding it a real problem to work with. Any help on this problem really appreciated. Nigel.
On Saturday 09 August 2008 00:20:33 Nigel Henry wrote:
Some days ago I ran the updates for my Don't Panic install, which said that KDE 3.5.9 was being upgraded to KDE4. I let this go ahead having asked on the list if there were likely to be any problems with KDE4.
I also have recently installed Fedora 9 which comes with KDE4 as default, so this is not a pop at Archlinux, but more with KDE4, which I'm finding is virtually unuseable. I'm posting this from Fedora Core 2, which has KDE 3.2.2-14.FC2.2.legacy Red Hat, and apart from the odd konqueror crash when accessing certain web sites, there are no problems. KDE4 is a whole different ball game.
The question is, is it possible to somehow revert back to KDE 3.5.9 without reinstalling. Reinstalling would mean that I only have the package versions that were on the install cd. I do have another instance of Dont Panic, that hasn't been upgraded to KDE4, and all the updates prior to the upgrade to KDE4 are available, and looking at /var/cache/pacman/pkg there don't appear to be any KDE updates until the transition to KDE4.
If I do have to reinstall this instance of Don't Panic that has been upgraded to KDE4, is there some way to prevent the upgrade to KDE4 on the fresh install?
Apologies if I'm offending anyone that loves KDE4, but I'm finding it a real problem to work with.
Any help on this problem really appreciated.
Nigel. Nigel, you can use KDEmod if you want KDE 3.
But I'd also appreciate if there were packages with latest KDE 3, the package names could be suffixed with '3' (like kdelibs3). Could someone competent reveal, if something similar is planned? Thanks Dan
On Sat, Aug 9, 2008 at 8:20 AM, Nigel Henry <cave.dnb2m97pp@aliceadsl.fr> wrote:
Some days ago I ran the updates for my Don't Panic install, which said that KDE 3.5.9 was being upgraded to KDE4. I let this go ahead having asked on the list if there were likely to be any problems with KDE4.
I also have recently installed Fedora 9 which comes with KDE4 as default, so this is not a pop at Archlinux, but more with KDE4, which I'm finding is virtually unuseable. I'm posting this from Fedora Core 2, which has KDE 3.2.2-14.FC2.2.legacy Red Hat, and apart from the odd konqueror crash when accessing certain web sites, there are no problems. KDE4 is a whole different ball game.
I hear a lot of this, but never any specifics. And a search for KDE or even KDE4 on the bug tracker doesn't bring many bugs up. Not ideal search terms given the amount of apps, but you'd expect more than 10 results for something "virtually unusable" So maybe it'd be a good idea to file bugs about this "virtually unusable" DE.
On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 8:35 PM, James Rayner <iphitus@iphitus.org> wrote:
On Sat, Aug 9, 2008 at 8:20 AM, Nigel Henry <cave.dnb2m97pp@aliceadsl.fr> wrote:
Some days ago I ran the updates for my Don't Panic install, which said that KDE 3.5.9 was being upgraded to KDE4. I let this go ahead having asked on the list if there were likely to be any problems with KDE4.
I also have recently installed Fedora 9 which comes with KDE4 as default, so this is not a pop at Archlinux, but more with KDE4, which I'm finding is virtually unuseable. I'm posting this from Fedora Core 2, which has KDE 3.2.2-14.FC2.2.legacy Red Hat, and apart from the odd konqueror crash when accessing certain web sites, there are no problems. KDE4 is a whole different ball game.
I hear a lot of this, but never any specifics.
And a search for KDE or even KDE4 on the bug tracker doesn't bring many bugs up. Not ideal search terms given the amount of apps, but you'd expect more than 10 results for something "virtually unusable"
So maybe it'd be a good idea to file bugs about this "virtually unusable" DE.
Or pull the old PKGBUILDs from SVN and create your own repo housing the old KDE packages.
Aaron Griffin wrote:
On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 8:35 PM, James Rayner <iphitus@iphitus.org> wrote:
On Sat, Aug 9, 2008 at 8:20 AM, Nigel Henry <cave.dnb2m97pp@aliceadsl.fr> wrote:
Some days ago I ran the updates for my Don't Panic install, which said that KDE 3.5.9 was being upgraded to KDE4. I let this go ahead having asked on the list if there were likely to be any problems with KDE4.
I also have recently installed Fedora 9 which comes with KDE4 as default, so this is not a pop at Archlinux, but more with KDE4, which I'm finding is virtually unuseable. I'm posting this from Fedora Core 2, which has KDE 3.2.2-14.FC2.2.legacy Red Hat, and apart from the odd konqueror crash when accessing certain web sites, there are no problems. KDE4 is a whole different ball game. I hear a lot of this, but never any specifics.
And a search for KDE or even KDE4 on the bug tracker doesn't bring many bugs up. Not ideal search terms given the amount of apps, but you'd expect more than 10 results for something "virtually unusable"
So maybe it'd be a good idea to file bugs about this "virtually unusable" DE.
Or pull the old PKGBUILDs from SVN and create your own repo housing the old KDE packages.
I started looking into doing just that. I started thinking that's not sustainable on an ongoing basis though, for a few reasons: * I imagine after a while, many dependent packages in the Arch repos would get upgraded to incompatible versions and break the old KDE. * Ditto for KDE-based apps in the Arch repos. I imagine they'd start to break as they got updated for KDE 4. So then it'd be necessary to start maintaining them in the unofficial repo too. Looked like it could turn into a big job. I also started looking into a way to build KDE3 so that it could be installed side-by-side with KDE4 (i.e., install it into /opt/kde3). I even started to build some of the packages. But then I traded a couple of emails with one of the kdemod devs about that approach, and he seemed to think installing into /opt/kde3 wouldn't work and it was a bad idea. And that my efforts would be better directed towards helping them maintain kdemod3. (Perhaps rightly so.) After that I got busy and haven't been able to follow up. I still would very much like to get a viable kde3 repo up and running though. Would love to hear any suggestions/thoughts anyone might have on it. Thanks, DR
On Samstag, 9. August 2008 03:35 James Rayner wrote:
So maybe it'd be a good idea to file bugs about this "virtually unusable" DE.
I can speak only for me and the whole problems be kde4 at itself why i still use kdemod3. So if you want bug reports about problems from changes or problems of the mainstream than you have to say it but i don't think that the arch bug tracker is the right place for this.-) Or to say it other words: The packages be so good as possible and 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. See you, Attila
On Saturday 09 August 2008 20:38:27 Attila wrote:
Or to say it other words: The packages be so good as possible and 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. -- Shridhar
On Sun, 10 Aug 2008 02:52:30 pm Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
On Saturday 09 August 2008 20:38:27 Attila wrote:
Or to say it other words: The packages be so good as possible and 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
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.)
On Montag, 11. August 2008 02:38 w9ya@qrparci.net wrote:
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.
Thanks for the warning about printer management because if this doesn't work i will get killed by my girlfriend.-) I hope in 4.2 there will be a way to config konqueror instead of dolphin as the favorite file manager. See you, Attila
On Monday 11 August 2008 20:48:17 Attila wrote:
Thanks for the warning about printer management because if this doesn't work i will get killed by my girlfriend.-) I hope in 4.2 there will be a way to config konqueror instead of dolphin as the favorite file manager.
See if this helps. Try the tip for setting konqueror as default application in inode/directory entry. http://www.kde-forum.org/artikel/18366/dolphin-kde4.html. Also run kmenuedit(available when you right click on the K icon), there is a home entry which uses konqueror for file management. Unhide it. There are quite a few entries worth unhiding there, menu updator itself is one of them. This does not remove dolphin but at least makes konqueror available for file management in the menu. Oh BTW, it brings an error about cervisia kpart. Don't know if it is a kde bug or arch package problem. HTH -- Shridhar
On Montag, 11. August 2008 20:41 Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
See if this helps. Try the tip for setting konqueror as default application in inode/directory entry.
Thanks for this and the other hints. I will try them the next time as i boot my test partition.
This does not remove dolphin but at least makes konqueror available for file management in the menu
No problem, i don't want to remove dolphin, i only don't want to use it.-) There is an applet which offers to run the different profiles of the konqueror and with it i can run "konqueror --profile filemanagement" too. But this is not the same as you suggest. See you, Attila
On Montag, 11. August 2008 20:41 Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
See if this helps. Try the tip for setting konqueror as default application in inode/directory entry.
This works perfect and i must say that i was too stupid to find it because it is the same as under kde3.-)
Oh BTW, it brings an error about cervisia kpart. Don't know if it is a kde bug or arch package problem.
This happens to me too if i choose for the command "konqueror --profile filemanagement" but it works without an error with "kfmclient openURL". See you, Attila
On Monday 11 August 2008 03:27:56 richard terry wrote:
On Sun, 10 Aug 2008 02:52:30 pm Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
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.
Yes, lots of small things are broken. Power management is definitely a big one. I had posted a long account of my KDE4 experiences to this list sometimes back. I have filed bugs in KDE bugzilla, 167809,167811, 168482 etc. I also have a list of bugs to be filed, not to mention adding votes. I hope kde4.1.1 is out soon, patching lots of these small bugs. -- Shridhar
On Sonntag, 10. August 2008 06:52 Shridhar Daithankar wrote: At first i have to say that my only intention was to answer why there is no kde4 bug report from mine instead there be a lot of reasons for myself to stay with kde3. I have no impatience and can wait until kde 4.2 to test it again.
Could you please elaborate? I am curious to know what is so wrong.
The kicker have some nice features for me: - Real transparent style without the need of a special theme - The possibility to expand terminal sessions, system settings, last documents and so on - Better applets. My favorit here is "Schnellstarter" (perhaps in english it is fast display browser) where i have 3 ones for special directories. - I prefer to browse through menus instead of having minimal square - And the last one is not important but i must say that the configuration dialog of the new panel is a gui from the last century.
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 think this all, and lot more, is a personal thing how you have used kde in the past and i am sure that there be a lot of other users which like this "plasma way". But i don't see any advantage for me at the moment but a lot of disadvantages. Still again, this has nothing to do with the arch packages at itselfs. See you, Attila
Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
On Saturday 09 August 2008 20:38:27 Attila wrote:
Or to say it other words: The packages be so good as possible and 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.
I'll bite. * *All* my kde3 settings are gone and I'd need to manually port them over to KDE4. * The KDE3 color schemes are gone. I'd need to manually port my colors over to KDE4. * The widget style I like to use is gone. The ones provided are not very similar. * The window decorations I like to use are gone. The ones provided are not very similar. * Kpersonalizer is gone. I liked this util very much, as it allowed me in one fell swoop to set all my shortcut keys to emulate Windows. Without it I need to manually set all my shortcut keys. And that's just what I was able to come up with in a 1-hour test drive. Bottom line: I was faced with the prospect of many hours of tweaking just to get my desktop back to the way I like it. And there didn't seem to be any compelling benefits to KDE4 to offset this aggravation set. I'm more than open to hearing counter-arguments as to why someone thinks it's worth the switch. DR
On Montag, 11. August 2008 18:07 David Rosenstrauch wrote:
I'm more than open to hearing counter-arguments as to why someone thinks it's worth the switch
I'm frustated as you but i must say that there was no way for the arch devs to make it right for everyone. Imagine that there is no kde4 in the repos and than you will read a lot of "i want kde4" wishes instead of "i want my kde3 back". Because we have kdemod3 i can live with this switch and i have no problem to accept that there be other users who enjoy using kde4. So my problems has only to be with the kde4 devs. But this be only my 2c. See you, Attila P.S.: The problem with old settings is nothing new in kde and it seems that the kde devs have no interest to offer a working solution for it. I think everyone of us who use kde for a longer time have deleted more than one time the ~/.kde directory because something goes wrong after an update. And i'm sure that this will happens with kde 5.x too.-)
Attila wrote:
On Montag, 11. August 2008 18:07 David Rosenstrauch wrote:
I'm more than open to hearing counter-arguments as to why someone thinks it's worth the switch
I'm frustated as you but i must say that there was no way for the arch devs to make it right for everyone. Imagine that there is no kde4 in the repos and than you will read a lot of "i want kde4" wishes instead of "i want my kde3 back".
I have no qualms with what the devs did. KDE4 is out, and so the Arch devs have to upgrade to it. (And in fact, IMO, they even were pretty cautious about the upgrade, waiting several months until 4.1 was released before upgrading.) Arch is a distro that uses "bleeding edge" software, and we all know that going in. And if somebody wants to use old packages, the onus is on them to make it happen. My qualms are with the KDE4 software itself. I'm not saying it's bad. (In fact, I'll admit that I've barely even tried any of the new functionality.) It's just that it's a very big a change to a lot of important desktop functionality that I rely on, and would be too disruptive for me to switch over right now. I probably could get used to it over time, though, which is why I'd like to be able to install KDE 3 and 4 simultaneously, and so be able to switch into KDE4 and kick the tires every now and then, without having to completely wipe KDE3 off my system. The state I'm in now (keeping KDE3 via a number of IgnorePkg directives in my pacman.conf) is not sustainable long-term, so I'm going to have to get a bit more proactive soon and come up with some solution. DR
On Montag, 11. August 2008 19:09 David Rosenstrauch wrote:
My qualms are with the KDE4 software itself. I'm not saying it's bad. (In fact, I'll admit that I've barely even tried any of the new functionality.) It's just that it's a very big a change to a lot of important desktop functionality that I rely on, and would be too disruptive for me to switch over right now.
That is the same for me.
The state I'm in now (keeping KDE3 via a number of IgnorePkg directives in my pacman.conf) is not sustainable long-term, so I'm going to have to get a bit more proactive soon and come up with some solution.
Is there a reason why you don't use kdemod3? But okay, that is only the half of the story because perhaps you have to compile some of the packages which you use by yourself. I think it is worth to do this because the next big step in kde4 will not before Jan 2009. This is very long time and kde 3.5.10 will come out during this year. Using kdemod3 is easier than to create a own repo but this is again only my opinion about it. See you, Attila
Attila wrote:
Is there a reason why you don't use kdemod3?
I probably will wind up using it. (Since the alternative seems to be creating and maintaining my own KDE3 repo.) I've been reluctant to use it so though, since I don't really agree with their approach: * They build break KDE into small, modular packages, instead of just using the packaging supplied by upstream KDE. I use most of the apps that KDE supplies, and so don't care about the modularity. * They patch the upstream KDE packages in a number of ways. I strongly prefer to use packages that are as unpatched and plain vanilla from upstream as possible. DR
On Montag, 11. August 2008 20:38 David Rosenstrauch wrote: I have had the same feeling as you and take first a look at it in my arch64 test partition. If you have such a possibility too or a virtual machine with archlinux than give it a try.
* They build break KDE into small, modular packages, instead of just using the packaging supplied by upstream KDE. I use most of the apps that KDE supplies, and so don't care about the modularity.
In the first moment as i only read this on their homepage i think the same as you but now i must admit that i enjoy removing some of this little apps which i never use.-)
* They patch the upstream KDE packages in a number of ways. I strongly prefer to use packages that are as unpatched and plain vanilla from upstream as possible.
The patches been well documented and you can browse through their svn repository. I can understand you again and the only thing what i can say is that i don't have the feeling that they have useless patches. Still again this be only my minds and no commands.-) See you, Attila
Attila wrote:
On Montag, 11. August 2008 20:38 David Rosenstrauch wrote:
I have had the same feeling as you and take first a look at it in my arch64 test partition. If you have such a possibility too or a virtual machine with archlinux than give it a try.
* They build break KDE into small, modular packages, instead of just using the packaging supplied by upstream KDE. I use most of the apps that KDE supplies, and so don't care about the modularity.
In the first moment as i only read this on their homepage i think the same as you but now i must admit that i enjoy removing some of this little apps which i never use.-)
* They patch the upstream KDE packages in a number of ways. I strongly prefer to use packages that are as unpatched and plain vanilla from upstream as possible.
The patches been well documented and you can browse through their svn repository. I can understand you again and the only thing what i can say is that i don't have the feeling that they have useless patches.
Still again this be only my minds and no commands.-)
See you, Attila
I took the plunge and switched over my 3 arch boxes to kdemod3 yesterday. Seems pretty solid, and as I chose to install the kdemod3-vanilla option, it's probably about as close to stock kde3 as I'm going to get. There's still one or two little customization tweaks that they've added that I'm not too fond of, but they're pretty minor, and I'll probably be able to find a workaround. Definitely major kudos to the kdemod guys for all the hard work on making this available to everyone. DR
On Tuesday 12 August 2008 17:18, David Rosenstrauch wrote:
Attila wrote:
On Montag, 11. August 2008 20:38 David Rosenstrauch wrote:
I have had the same feeling as you and take first a look at it in my arch64 test partition. If you have such a possibility too or a virtual machine with archlinux than give it a try.
* They build break KDE into small, modular packages, instead of just using the packaging supplied by upstream KDE. I use most of the apps that KDE supplies, and so don't care about the modularity.
In the first moment as i only read this on their homepage i think the same as you but now i must admit that i enjoy removing some of this little apps which i never use.-)
* They patch the upstream KDE packages in a number of ways. I strongly prefer to use packages that are as unpatched and plain vanilla from upstream as possible.
The patches been well documented and you can browse through their svn repository. I can understand you again and the only thing what i can say is that i don't have the feeling that they have useless patches.
Still again this be only my minds and no commands.-)
See you, Attila
I took the plunge and switched over my 3 arch boxes to kdemod3 yesterday. Seems pretty solid, and as I chose to install the kdemod3-vanilla option, it's probably about as close to stock kde3 as I'm going to get. There's still one or two little customization tweaks that they've added that I'm not too fond of, but they're pretty minor, and I'll probably be able to find a workaround.
Definitely major kudos to the kdemod guys for all the hard work on making this available to everyone.
DR
Well I too have just got my KDE 3.5.9 desktop back, courtesy of the kdemod guys, and have also just got the sounds back as well. I thought I was being clever last night in selecting pacman -S kdemod3-complete. This was some 300+MB of dialup downloads, and the machine that I have recently built has a habit of totally locking up from time to time. Needless to say the following morning the machine had not only locked up, but had switched itself off (that's a first). OK, lets start again. Now I select the basic pacman -S kdemod3, and some 125MB of download, and that progresses with no problems, and I now have the KDE 3.5.9 desktop, and thankfully sounds. Can't find kscd though, and /usr/share/applications only shows an empty directory for kde4, and I was trying to find konquerors superuser file manager to add to the desktop. Any help on getting access to kscd would be welcome, as it's nice to be able to play some tunes. No real complaints though. At least I've got rid of the horrible KDE4, abd got back a 3.5.9 desktop, that I can work with, although a few bits still missing. Nigel.
Nigel Henry wrote:
Any help on getting access to kscd would be welcome, as it's nice to be able to play some tunes.
Try pacman -S kdemod3-vanilla. That's pretty much the equivalent of the stock KDE packages, albeit, in modular form, and with a few tweaks. (And, yes, kscd and the rest of the kde apps you know and love are included.) Shouldn't be too onerous a download now that you've already got the base installed. (And obviously somewhat smaller than kdemod3-complete too.) DR
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 06:07:00PM -0400, David Rosenstrauch wrote:
Nigel Henry wrote:
Any help on getting access to kscd would be welcome, as it's nice to be able to play some tunes.
Try pacman -S kdemod3-vanilla. That's pretty much the equivalent of the stock KDE packages, albeit, in modular form, and with a few tweaks. (And, yes, kscd and the rest of the kde apps you know and love are included.)
Try also: pacman -Ss kscd Wonderful tool! bye, ad
On Wednesday 13 August 2008 00:07, David Rosenstrauch wrote:
Nigel Henry wrote:
Any help on getting access to kscd would be welcome, as it's nice to be able to play some tunes.
Try pacman -S kdemod3-vanilla. That's pretty much the equivalent of the stock KDE packages, albeit, in modular form, and with a few tweaks. (And, yes, kscd and the rest of the kde apps you know and love are included.)
Shouldn't be too onerous a download now that you've already got the base installed. (And obviously somewhat smaller than kdemod3-complete too.)
DR
Thanks for the advice David. That's downloading now. Nigel.
David Rosenstrauch wrote:
Nigel Henry wrote:
Any help on getting access to kscd would be welcome, as it's nice to be able to play some tunes.
Try pacman -S kdemod3-vanilla. That's pretty much the equivalent of the stock KDE packages, albeit, in modular form, and with a few tweaks. (And, yes, kscd and the rest of the kde apps you know and love are included.)
Shouldn't be too onerous a download now that you've already got the base installed. (And obviously somewhat smaller than kdemod3-complete too.)
DR
While we're on this topic, anyone know where krdc has gone? Glenn
It's still there, and now wih tabs (uefull whn connecting to everal server at once) # pacman -Qo /usr/bin/krdc /usr/bin/krdc is owned by kdenetwork 4.1.0-2 On 13 août 08, at 11:30, RedShift wrote:
While we're on this topic, anyone know where krdc has gone?
Glenn
While I'm answering in this thread. I try something when upgrading: cp -r ~/.kde ~/.kde4 Then kde4 start right, I kept a lot of my settings, and since then, it running nicely, no problem. I juts recompiled the xine-lib with pulseaudio support to get sound working, but kdepim is there, kate is there, konsole is thre. I lost my panels organisation, but, indeed, it(s not so much a nightmare like everyone in this thread seems to think. -- slubman site: http://www.slubman.info/
On Wednesday 13 August 2008 00:07, David Rosenstrauch wrote:
Nigel Henry wrote:
Any help on getting access to kscd would be welcome, as it's nice to be able to play some tunes.
Try pacman -S kdemod3-vanilla. That's pretty much the equivalent of the stock KDE packages, albeit, in modular form, and with a few tweaks. (And, yes, kscd and the rest of the kde apps you know and love are included.)
Shouldn't be too onerous a download now that you've already got the base installed. (And obviously somewhat smaller than kdemod3-complete too.)
DR
Hi David. Many thanks for suggesting the vanilla version of kdemod3. Things are now back to where they were before the upgrade to KDE4.1. I'll probably do the same on my other instance of Archlinux, which I havn't yet updated to KDE4.1, as personally I find the KDE4 desktop hard to deal with. I still Have Fedora 9, which has KDE4.05, and will continue to update that, and see how KDE4 progresses, but I have to say that KDE4 is very different to what I've been used to since Fedora Core 1. I suppose if you're a new user to Linux, and the distro you install has KDE4 as default, you just learn to use it, as you've never experienced KDE3. It's probably fair to say that a lot of us don't like big changes in what we're used to. I'm posting from Fedora Core 2, which has KDE 3.2.2, and genuinly don't see much difference when comparing it with KDE 3.5.9, but the jump to KDE4 is a whole different ballgame. Anyway, I've done, with some help, what I set out to do, and got KDE3 back on my Archlinux install. Thanks to all on the list. Nigel.
Nigel Henry wrote:
On Wednesday 13 August 2008 00:07, David Rosenstrauch wrote:
Nigel Henry wrote:
Any help on getting access to kscd would be welcome, as it's nice to be able to play some tunes. Try pacman -S kdemod3-vanilla. That's pretty much the equivalent of the stock KDE packages, albeit, in modular form, and with a few tweaks. (And, yes, kscd and the rest of the kde apps you know and love are included.)
Shouldn't be too onerous a download now that you've already got the base installed. (And obviously somewhat smaller than kdemod3-complete too.)
DR
Hi David. Many thanks for suggesting the vanilla version of kdemod3. Things are now back to where they were before the upgrade to KDE4.1.
Anyway, I've done, with some help, what I set out to do, and got KDE3 back on my Archlinux install.
Thanks to all on the list.
Nigel.
Glad to hear it, Nigel, and happy to help. DR
just my two cents: complain at the upstream. It's their fault. kde declared 4.1 production ready. archlinux just provides binary packages for the latest stable upstream package. If you don't like that, archlinux is the wrong distro. Yes kde4 IS EPIC FAIL. but thats really not archlinux' fault. I installed gnome. -- best regards Arvid Ephraim Picciani
Arvid Ephraim Picciani wrote:
just my two cents: complain at the upstream. It's their fault. kde declared 4.1 production ready. archlinux just provides binary packages for the latest stable upstream package. If you don't like that, archlinux is the wrong distro.
Exactly as I said earlier in the thread: "I have no qualms with what the devs did. KDE4 is out, and so the Arch devs have to upgrade to it. (And in fact, IMO, they even were pretty cautious about the upgrade, waiting several months until 4.1 was released before upgrading.) Arch is a distro that uses "bleeding edge" software, and we all know that going in. And if somebody wants to use old packages, the onus is on them to make it happen."
Yes kde4 IS EPIC FAIL. but thats really not archlinux' fault. I installed gnome.
I'm reserving judgment on it till I've had a chance to really use it in a major way. It might turn out to be great for me in the long run. But I'm a bit busy right now, and it's just too much of a change to my environment for me to take on right now. So, dunno - "epic fail" seems a bit premature for me right now. DR
So, dunno - "epic fail" seems a bit premature for me right now.
I'm following kde development since 5 years, and read about 1/4 of kde base code. I'm sure it's going to work for the majority of users around 4.3. Not for me. But i'm weird ;) When a working machine sowly evolves into beeing mission critical, you begin to have high quality demands. -- best regards Arvid Ephraim Picciani
On Mittwoch, 13. August 2008 00:25 Arvid Ephraim Picciani wrote:
I'm following kde development since 5 years, and read about 1/4 of kde base code. I'm sure it's going to work for the majority of users around 4.3.
Not with 4.2 ... not nice to hear.
Not for me. But i'm weird ;)
What be your reasons why it will not works for you? I ask because i give me time until 4.2 to decide where i want to go. See you, Attila
On Dienstag, 12. August 2008 23:54 Nigel Henry wrote:
Can't find kscd though, and /usr/share/applications only shows an empty directory for kde4, and I was trying to find konquerors superuser file manager to add to the desktop.
As said from David "pacman -S kdemod3-vanilla" should solve your problem. kscd is in the package kdemod3-kdemultimedia-kscd and you will found the app in /opt/kde/bin. Good luck, Attila
On Monday 11 August 2008 19:09, David Rosenstrauch wrote:
Attila wrote:
On Montag, 11. August 2008 18:07 David Rosenstrauch wrote:
I'm more than open to hearing counter-arguments as to why someone thinks it's worth the switch
I'm frustated as you but i must say that there was no way for the arch devs to make it right for everyone. Imagine that there is no kde4 in the repos and than you will read a lot of "i want kde4" wishes instead of "i want my kde3 back".
I have no qualms with what the devs did. KDE4 is out, and so the Arch devs have to upgrade to it. (And in fact, IMO, they even were pretty cautious about the upgrade, waiting several months until 4.1 was released before upgrading.) Arch is a distro that uses "bleeding edge" software, and we all know that going in. And if somebody wants to use old packages, the onus is on them to make it happen.
My qualms are with the KDE4 software itself. I'm not saying it's bad. (In fact, I'll admit that I've barely even tried any of the new functionality.) It's just that it's a very big a change to a lot of important desktop functionality that I rely on, and would be too disruptive for me to switch over right now.
I probably could get used to it over time, though, which is why I'd like to be able to install KDE 3 and 4 simultaneously, and so be able to switch into KDE4 and kick the tires every now and then, without having to completely wipe KDE3 off my system.
The state I'm in now (keeping KDE3 via a number of IgnorePkg directives in my pacman.conf) is not sustainable long-term, so I'm going to have to get a bit more proactive soon and come up with some solution.
DR
I initiated this thread. I had been downloading Fedora 9 (6cd's on dialup) which has KDE4 as default), finished the downloads and burned the cd's, but chose to update other distros before installing Fedora 9. Bad move me thinks. Archlinux was going to upgrade to KDE4, and on asking a ? on the list there were mixed opinions. Anyway, I let the upgrade go ahead. Another bad move. leaving aside Fedora, which more or less appears to be a test ground, where Redhat can get feedback, which will help in their next release of Redhat, I believe that it may have been better if Archlinux had gone the way of Kubuntu/Ubuntu's Hardy Heron 8.04 release. Here KDE 3.5.9 is the default, but with the option of using KDE4. I have Kubuntu 8.04 installed, and using the default KDE 3.5.9. I don't know how installing KDE4 as the option works, whether it runs side by side with KDE 3.5.9, or replaces KDE 3.5.9. If Archlinux had made the KDE4 packages available as an option, I believe this may have been the best way to go. that way you could have installed another instance of Archlinux on some spare harddrive space, and tried out KDE4, without, as it has turned out for me, finding that you now have a KDE desktop that has gone back into the dark ages. I'm posting from Fedora Core 2, that is using KDE 3.2.2-14.FC2.legacy Red Hat. Apart from the odd Konqueror crash when accessing certain websites, there are no problems, and FC2 is ancient, and no longer supported. At the moment I'm trying to find a way to revert to KDE 3.5.9, without re-installing Archlinux. I've installed Gnome, which goes against the grain, as I don't normally use it, but just want a desktop that I can use after removing all the KDE4 packages, and at the moment is better than KDE4. Next step will be to find the packages to reinstall KDE 3.5.9, and attempt to reinstall them. Someone mentioned getting them from svn, and I have the install disk. Can I somehow get the KDE 3.5.9 packages off the install disk, and install them? I'll start a new thread for this, unless anyone here has any suggestions. This is a whole bundle of fun at the moment, and it's not like I use any of my distros for serious work. I can really understand someone needing to use their OS for their work, upgrading, and finding that the desktop has gone back to start ( "start" reference being to board games). Again I would like to restate, that this is not a knock at Archlinux, but at KDE4, which personally I feel is not ready for release as a replacement for KDE 3.5.9. Nigel, and expecting "Incoming"
Nigel Henry wrote:
At the moment I'm trying to find a way to revert to KDE 3.5.9, without re-installing Archlinux.
As was pointed out earlier, this is easily done by using the kdemod repo. They have kde3, albeit in modular form, and patched some. Details here: http://kdemod.ath.cx/bbs/viewtopic.php?id=892 DR
On Monday 11 August 2008 22:18:13 Attila wrote:
P.S.: The problem with old settings is nothing new in kde and it seems that the kde devs have no interest to offer a working solution for it. I think everyone of us who use kde for a longer time have deleted more than one time the ~/.kde directory because something goes wrong after an update. And i'm sure that this will happens with kde 5.x too.-)
I agree and disagree. The ~.kde has been amazingly stable for me as far as kde3.x series has gone. My home dir has gone from mandrake 8 to slackware12 over the years and across the distro. Not a problem, not a single setting lost. With KDE4.1, it is ~/.kde4, and as pointed out in another mail by DR, it is incompatible. (Which is ok. The base desktop is not finished, I wouldn't expect a migration utility to up before that). Worse is both ~/.kde and ~/.kde4 are used. I kept ~/.kde for importing stuff as-and-when required and deleted it after few days. Log back in and my kmail config is empty. Just wow.. -- Shridhar
On Montag, 11. August 2008 19:56 Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
I agree and disagree.
Me too.-)) At first i want to say that i mean more the step from kde1 to kde2 and from kde2 to kde3.
The ~.kde has been amazingly stable for me as far as kde3.x series has gone. My home dir has gone from mandrake 8 to slackware12 over the years and across the distro. Not a problem, not a single setting lost.
I have not had the same positive result as i change from opensuse to archlinux. But it is nice to hear that this was possible in your case.
With KDE4.1, it is ~/.kde4, and as pointed out in another mail by DR, it is incompatible. (Which is ok. The base desktop is not finished, I wouldn't expect a migration utility to up before that). Worse is both ~/.kde and ~/.kde4 are used.
Sorry, but if the desktop is not finished than this is the same as it should not be released. That is something what i can't understand for the kde devs: They say 4.1 is ready to use but they don't trust their own work and use another config directory. But okay this is now the reality and it is too late to change something.
I kept ~/.kde for importing stuff as-and-when required and deleted it after few days. Log back in and my kmail config is empty. Just wow..
Thanks for the warning to save the .kde dir on more than one place. See you, Attila
On Sun, Aug 10, 2008 at 1:08 AM, Attila <attila@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On Samstag, 9. August 2008 03:35 James Rayner wrote:
So maybe it'd be a good idea to file bugs about this "virtually unusable" DE.
I can speak only for me and the whole problems be kde4 at itself why i still use kdemod3. So if you want bug reports about problems from changes or problems of the mainstream than you have to say it but i don't think that the arch bug tracker is the right place for this.-)
I don't recall specifying what bug tracker. At least Shridhar got the point, filing bugs at the KDE tracker (they have one too!) *shrug* I'm running KDE4.1 now to see what the fuss is about. I used KDE3 pretty extensively last year, so it'll be an interesting comparison. James
participants (13)
-
Aaron Griffin
-
Alessandro Doro
-
Arvid Ephraim Picciani
-
Attila
-
Dan Vratil
-
David Rosenstrauch
-
James Rayner
-
Nigel Henry
-
RedShift
-
richard terry
-
Shridhar Daithankar
-
slubman
-
w9ya＠qrparci.net