Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #689406 > unrolled thread
| Started by | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2025-04-23 09:11 -0400 |
| Last post | 2025-04-25 01:27 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 258 — 14 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-23 09:11 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-24 12:43 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-24 09:07 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-25 01:25 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-04-25 05:12 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-26 02:53 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> - 2025-04-25 19:27 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-25 15:38 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-04-26 00:42 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-24 13:31 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-24 09:47 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-25 01:28 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-25 12:06 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-25 23:16 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-26 00:50 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-26 01:21 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-26 03:03 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-04-26 07:34 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-26 08:04 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-26 03:00 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-26 10:09 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-04-26 05:53 -0500
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-26 11:02 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-26 23:00 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-27 07:24 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-27 08:50 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-28 12:41 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-29 02:50 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-29 13:52 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-27 06:35 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-27 07:18 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-04-27 08:45 -0500
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-28 11:44 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-04-28 17:05 -0500
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-04-28 17:11 -0500
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-29 02:51 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-29 09:02 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-29 14:08 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-29 11:07 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-30 10:24 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-30 09:13 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-01 14:15 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-01 14:42 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-02 15:03 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-02 20:33 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-05-03 08:18 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-03 21:34 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-01 18:43 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-02 00:17 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-01 21:47 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-02 07:43 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-02 09:13 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-02 20:16 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> - 2025-05-02 20:47 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-02 19:31 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-03 00:13 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-02 22:16 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-03 10:50 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-03 09:31 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-04 09:51 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-04 08:23 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-04 13:38 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-04 18:00 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-05 11:03 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-05 08:40 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-05-04 14:40 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-05-04 11:52 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-04 20:05 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-05 04:50 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-05-05 18:50 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-05-05 14:55 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-03 04:29 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-02 15:20 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-02 11:28 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-03 00:11 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-02 20:15 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-03 01:02 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-02 22:24 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-03 10:56 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-05-03 08:29 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-03 10:39 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-04 10:04 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-04 08:24 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-04 20:10 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-05 04:48 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-05 08:36 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-05 17:06 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-05 14:04 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-05 18:59 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-05 15:24 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-06 02:21 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-06 11:00 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-06 20:58 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-06 19:43 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-08 00:29 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-08 03:28 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-08 10:02 -0400
Linux again (was: Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome) vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-05-07 04:18 +0000
Re: Linux again (was: Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome) Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-05-07 00:56 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-06 07:13 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-06 08:04 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-06 20:43 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-06 06:54 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-05-07 17:30 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-05-08 07:06 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-06 06:53 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-06 06:42 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-06 11:02 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-03 19:36 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-03 04:02 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-03 08:16 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-03 21:23 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-03 19:45 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-04 02:06 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-04 07:37 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-04-30 18:17 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-01 14:03 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-01 13:52 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-29 22:49 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-26 22:57 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-27 07:33 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-27 08:51 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-28 12:02 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-29 02:47 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-04-27 09:12 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-28 01:15 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-28 11:51 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-04-28 08:37 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-29 02:48 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-04-27 08:49 -0500
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-28 11:45 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-27 06:33 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-27 07:31 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-27 08:53 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-04-27 08:51 -0500
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-28 07:33 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-28 08:45 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-04-28 17:42 -0500
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-28 18:51 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-04-29 02:26 +0000
Re: Evolution (was Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome) Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-29 02:54 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-28 12:33 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-29 02:56 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-29 13:59 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-06-10 01:06 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-28 07:27 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-28 12:14 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-29 02:53 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-29 14:01 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-06-10 01:05 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-26 08:15 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-26 23:03 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-27 06:46 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-04-27 07:41 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-27 14:30 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-04-28 02:51 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-28 08:33 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-27 06:45 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-27 08:15 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-28 07:35 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-27 14:41 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-28 07:42 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-28 11:40 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-28 12:25 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-28 08:49 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-04-28 18:03 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-28 20:01 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-28 16:47 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-29 06:15 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-29 09:23 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-29 14:21 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-29 11:24 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-29 21:11 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-29 17:33 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-29 22:14 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-29 19:37 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-30 00:25 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-04-30 00:30 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-04-29 18:22 -0700
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-04-30 01:39 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-30 08:53 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-01 13:54 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-01 13:28 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-02 00:09 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-01 21:45 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-02 15:31 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-02 11:41 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-30 10:15 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-30 09:07 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-29 21:03 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-02 22:56 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-02 19:48 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-30 10:13 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-02 22:51 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-03 03:49 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-02 22:49 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-02 19:45 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-03 05:27 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-03 08:18 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-04 06:58 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-04 08:14 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-05 04:41 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-30 10:11 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-04-29 15:26 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-04-29 08:56 -0700
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-04-29 16:10 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-04-29 09:48 -0700
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-30 10:10 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-30 09:05 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-01 14:24 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-05-01 17:04 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-05-01 11:01 -0700
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-01 19:18 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-01 23:30 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-02 16:01 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-01 18:47 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-02 23:26 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-03 01:09 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-03 03:56 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-03 05:42 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-03 10:45 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-04 07:02 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-04 08:39 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-05 04:44 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-05 06:24 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-04-30 18:20 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-01 14:01 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-02 23:15 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-02 19:55 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-03 05:32 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-03 08:23 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-03 01:06 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-03 05:36 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-03 04:14 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-29 13:26 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-28 08:48 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-28 19:58 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-28 16:46 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-29 06:11 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-29 13:38 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-04-29 00:11 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-04-28 17:20 -0700
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-04-29 01:27 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-04-29 02:52 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-29 13:29 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-27 08:13 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-26 02:57 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> - 2025-04-24 18:54 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-04-24 20:35 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-04-24 14:04 -0700
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-24 17:26 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-04-24 21:45 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-04-24 21:48 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-04-24 14:57 -0700
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-24 21:53 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-04-24 14:58 -0700
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-25 01:29 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-25 01:27 +0000
Page 9 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 … 13 Next page →
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-27 14:41 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <HTuPP.2635138$eNx6.1862988@fx14.iad> |
| In reply to | #689526 |
On 4/27/25 02:45, RonB wrote: > On 2025-04-26, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >> On 4/25/25 23:00, RonB wrote: >>> On 2025-04-26, Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>> On 2025-04-25, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: >>>>> On Fri, 25 Apr 2025 12:06:53 -0000 (UTC), Borax Man wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I understand the problems with X11, and supporting legacy, but you can't >>>>>> just throw out decades of work and break it because its hard. >>>>> >>>>> Somebody has to come along and offer to do the work. If nobody does, then >>>>> yes, the existing developers are quite justified in saying “that’s not >>>>> worth it, let’s just drop it”. >>>> >>>> >>>> But they ARE doing work. They're creating new stuff that lack some >>>> degree of compatibility with the old. This is the problem, devs work on >>>> what the want to work on, not what people need. >>>> >>>> In no one was willing to work on free software, that would make sense, >>>> but people are working on reinventing the wheel again and again. We >>>> also had Mir. TWO projects. Duplication. >>> >>> Kind of like Ubuntu trying to force Unity on everyone because "they knew >>> better." Or Gnome making huge changes in Gnome 3 because they knew better >>> than the user what the *should* want. That's basically why Linux Mint took >>> off. Mate and Cinnamon were what a LOT of users wanted, not Gnome 3 or >>> Unity. >> >> In the end, a lot of people ended up liking Gnome 3's way of doing >> things, and it is at the core of a few desktop environments. As for >> Unity and Mir, I liked the interface of Unity enough to seek it out in >> Ubuntu's iteration of Gnome, and Mir was a step in the right direction. >> Had Wayland not already have been in development, I doubt people would >> have had such a negative opinion of Canonical's decision to move away >> from X11. > > Not me. Never liked either Unity or Gnome 3. I also don't like that > customization of Gnome 3 was always an afterthought, with add-ons that broke > with each release. Gnome developers seemed to have had a "take it or leave > it," mindset. It's gotten a bit better over time but, still, when you ask > about moving the top bar to the bottom, and ask why Gnome 3 doesn't a > provide a method to do that, you get snarky responses claiming this the top > position is "somehow" superior. I don't like it there, it feels > "claustrophobic" to me. I always moved the Gnome 2 bar to the bottom. Add-ins > are supposed to fix this, but usually they only work for such and such > version and are often abandoned. You're right about the extensions. I abandoned the idea of using them when I noticed that they ceased to function the moment the version of Gnome increased. > As for X11 vs Wayland, not quite sure how that fits in the Gnome 3 and Unity > vs Gnome 2 debate. It's not the same debate but a similar one. People hated on Mir simply because Canonical introduced it. The company is apparently not allowed to introduce its own technology if the community already developed something similar. For example, Snap is hated even though it came out before Flatpak did and is an improvement on AppImage. I'm not a fan of Snap myself (I prefer Flatpak because of the software library and how it updates), but I can't say that it's bad. -- God be with you, CrudeSausage LibreOffice supporter John 14:6
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-28 07:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn100ucb4.cuiu.ronb02NOSPAM@3020m.home> |
| In reply to | #689554 |
On 2025-04-27, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: > On 4/27/25 02:45, RonB wrote: >> On 2025-04-26, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>> On 4/25/25 23:00, RonB wrote: >>>> On 2025-04-26, Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On 2025-04-25, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: >>>>>> On Fri, 25 Apr 2025 12:06:53 -0000 (UTC), Borax Man wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I understand the problems with X11, and supporting legacy, but you can't >>>>>>> just throw out decades of work and break it because its hard. >>>>>> >>>>>> Somebody has to come along and offer to do the work. If nobody does, then >>>>>> yes, the existing developers are quite justified in saying “that’s not >>>>>> worth it, let’s just drop it”. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> But they ARE doing work. They're creating new stuff that lack some >>>>> degree of compatibility with the old. This is the problem, devs work on >>>>> what the want to work on, not what people need. >>>>> >>>>> In no one was willing to work on free software, that would make sense, >>>>> but people are working on reinventing the wheel again and again. We >>>>> also had Mir. TWO projects. Duplication. >>>> >>>> Kind of like Ubuntu trying to force Unity on everyone because "they knew >>>> better." Or Gnome making huge changes in Gnome 3 because they knew better >>>> than the user what the *should* want. That's basically why Linux Mint took >>>> off. Mate and Cinnamon were what a LOT of users wanted, not Gnome 3 or >>>> Unity. >>> >>> In the end, a lot of people ended up liking Gnome 3's way of doing >>> things, and it is at the core of a few desktop environments. As for >>> Unity and Mir, I liked the interface of Unity enough to seek it out in >>> Ubuntu's iteration of Gnome, and Mir was a step in the right direction. >>> Had Wayland not already have been in development, I doubt people would >>> have had such a negative opinion of Canonical's decision to move away >>> from X11. >> >> Not me. Never liked either Unity or Gnome 3. I also don't like that >> customization of Gnome 3 was always an afterthought, with add-ons that broke >> with each release. Gnome developers seemed to have had a "take it or leave >> it," mindset. It's gotten a bit better over time but, still, when you ask >> about moving the top bar to the bottom, and ask why Gnome 3 doesn't a >> provide a method to do that, you get snarky responses claiming this the top >> position is "somehow" superior. I don't like it there, it feels >> "claustrophobic" to me. I always moved the Gnome 2 bar to the bottom. Add-ins >> are supposed to fix this, but usually they only work for such and such >> version and are often abandoned. > > You're right about the extensions. I abandoned the idea of using them > when I noticed that they ceased to function the moment the version of > Gnome increased. > >> As for X11 vs Wayland, not quite sure how that fits in the Gnome 3 and Unity >> vs Gnome 2 debate. > > It's not the same debate but a similar one. People hated on Mir simply > because Canonical introduced it. The company is apparently not allowed > to introduce its own technology if the community already developed > something similar. For example, Snap is hated even though it came out > before Flatpak did and is an improvement on AppImage. I'm not a fan of > Snap myself (I prefer Flatpak because of the software library and how it > updates), but I can't say that it's bad. I think the reason that people don't like Snaps is because Canonical made the Snap servers proprietary, under their control. It goes against the whole point of Linux, that it be open source. And I don't agree that Snaps are better than AppImages. I prefer AppImages over both Snaps and Flatpaks. -- Jesus sat with sinners: He didn't sin with them. Know the difference.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-28 11:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn100uq8q.ju6.rotflol2@geidiprime.bvh> |
| In reply to | #689581 |
On 2025-04-28, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2025-04-27, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >> On 4/27/25 02:45, RonB wrote: >>> On 2025-04-26, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>> On 4/25/25 23:00, RonB wrote: >>>>> On 2025-04-26, Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> On 2025-04-25, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>> On Fri, 25 Apr 2025 12:06:53 -0000 (UTC), Borax Man wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I understand the problems with X11, and supporting legacy, but you can't >>>>>>>> just throw out decades of work and break it because its hard. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Somebody has to come along and offer to do the work. If nobody does, then >>>>>>> yes, the existing developers are quite justified in saying “that’s not >>>>>>> worth it, let’s just drop it”. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> But they ARE doing work. They're creating new stuff that lack some >>>>>> degree of compatibility with the old. This is the problem, devs work on >>>>>> what the want to work on, not what people need. >>>>>> >>>>>> In no one was willing to work on free software, that would make sense, >>>>>> but people are working on reinventing the wheel again and again. We >>>>>> also had Mir. TWO projects. Duplication. >>>>> >>>>> Kind of like Ubuntu trying to force Unity on everyone because "they knew >>>>> better." Or Gnome making huge changes in Gnome 3 because they knew better >>>>> than the user what the *should* want. That's basically why Linux Mint took >>>>> off. Mate and Cinnamon were what a LOT of users wanted, not Gnome 3 or >>>>> Unity. >>>> >>>> In the end, a lot of people ended up liking Gnome 3's way of doing >>>> things, and it is at the core of a few desktop environments. As for >>>> Unity and Mir, I liked the interface of Unity enough to seek it out in >>>> Ubuntu's iteration of Gnome, and Mir was a step in the right direction. >>>> Had Wayland not already have been in development, I doubt people would >>>> have had such a negative opinion of Canonical's decision to move away >>>> from X11. >>> >>> Not me. Never liked either Unity or Gnome 3. I also don't like that >>> customization of Gnome 3 was always an afterthought, with add-ons that broke >>> with each release. Gnome developers seemed to have had a "take it or leave >>> it," mindset. It's gotten a bit better over time but, still, when you ask >>> about moving the top bar to the bottom, and ask why Gnome 3 doesn't a >>> provide a method to do that, you get snarky responses claiming this the top >>> position is "somehow" superior. I don't like it there, it feels >>> "claustrophobic" to me. I always moved the Gnome 2 bar to the bottom. Add-ins >>> are supposed to fix this, but usually they only work for such and such >>> version and are often abandoned. >> >> You're right about the extensions. I abandoned the idea of using them >> when I noticed that they ceased to function the moment the version of >> Gnome increased. >> >>> As for X11 vs Wayland, not quite sure how that fits in the Gnome 3 and Unity >>> vs Gnome 2 debate. >> >> It's not the same debate but a similar one. People hated on Mir simply >> because Canonical introduced it. The company is apparently not allowed >> to introduce its own technology if the community already developed >> something similar. For example, Snap is hated even though it came out >> before Flatpak did and is an improvement on AppImage. I'm not a fan of >> Snap myself (I prefer Flatpak because of the software library and how it >> updates), but I can't say that it's bad. > > I think the reason that people don't like Snaps is because Canonical made > the Snap servers proprietary, under their control. It goes against the whole > point of Linux, that it be open source. And I don't agree that Snaps are > better than AppImages. I prefer AppImages over both Snaps and Flatpaks. > I tried Snap. It brings to mind that quote about Meth, "Not even once...". It needed a daemon! It created additional mountpoints. Just to run a program? That was enough to tell me it was bad design.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-28 12:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn100usu2.2nf.ronb02NOSPAM@3020m.home> |
| In reply to | #689582 |
On 2025-04-28, Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> wrote: > On 2025-04-28, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 2025-04-27, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>> On 4/27/25 02:45, RonB wrote: >>>> On 2025-04-26, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>> On 4/25/25 23:00, RonB wrote: >>>>>> On 2025-04-26, Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On 2025-04-25, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>> On Fri, 25 Apr 2025 12:06:53 -0000 (UTC), Borax Man wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I understand the problems with X11, and supporting legacy, but you can't >>>>>>>>> just throw out decades of work and break it because its hard. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Somebody has to come along and offer to do the work. If nobody does, then >>>>>>>> yes, the existing developers are quite justified in saying “that’s not >>>>>>>> worth it, let’s just drop it”. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But they ARE doing work. They're creating new stuff that lack some >>>>>>> degree of compatibility with the old. This is the problem, devs work on >>>>>>> what the want to work on, not what people need. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In no one was willing to work on free software, that would make sense, >>>>>>> but people are working on reinventing the wheel again and again. We >>>>>>> also had Mir. TWO projects. Duplication. >>>>>> >>>>>> Kind of like Ubuntu trying to force Unity on everyone because "they knew >>>>>> better." Or Gnome making huge changes in Gnome 3 because they knew better >>>>>> than the user what the *should* want. That's basically why Linux Mint took >>>>>> off. Mate and Cinnamon were what a LOT of users wanted, not Gnome 3 or >>>>>> Unity. >>>>> >>>>> In the end, a lot of people ended up liking Gnome 3's way of doing >>>>> things, and it is at the core of a few desktop environments. As for >>>>> Unity and Mir, I liked the interface of Unity enough to seek it out in >>>>> Ubuntu's iteration of Gnome, and Mir was a step in the right direction. >>>>> Had Wayland not already have been in development, I doubt people would >>>>> have had such a negative opinion of Canonical's decision to move away >>>>> from X11. >>>> >>>> Not me. Never liked either Unity or Gnome 3. I also don't like that >>>> customization of Gnome 3 was always an afterthought, with add-ons that broke >>>> with each release. Gnome developers seemed to have had a "take it or leave >>>> it," mindset. It's gotten a bit better over time but, still, when you ask >>>> about moving the top bar to the bottom, and ask why Gnome 3 doesn't a >>>> provide a method to do that, you get snarky responses claiming this the top >>>> position is "somehow" superior. I don't like it there, it feels >>>> "claustrophobic" to me. I always moved the Gnome 2 bar to the bottom. Add-ins >>>> are supposed to fix this, but usually they only work for such and such >>>> version and are often abandoned. >>> >>> You're right about the extensions. I abandoned the idea of using them >>> when I noticed that they ceased to function the moment the version of >>> Gnome increased. >>> >>>> As for X11 vs Wayland, not quite sure how that fits in the Gnome 3 and Unity >>>> vs Gnome 2 debate. >>> >>> It's not the same debate but a similar one. People hated on Mir simply >>> because Canonical introduced it. The company is apparently not allowed >>> to introduce its own technology if the community already developed >>> something similar. For example, Snap is hated even though it came out >>> before Flatpak did and is an improvement on AppImage. I'm not a fan of >>> Snap myself (I prefer Flatpak because of the software library and how it >>> updates), but I can't say that it's bad. >> >> I think the reason that people don't like Snaps is because Canonical made >> the Snap servers proprietary, under their control. It goes against the whole >> point of Linux, that it be open source. And I don't agree that Snaps are >> better than AppImages. I prefer AppImages over both Snaps and Flatpaks. >> > > I tried Snap. It brings to mind that quote about Meth, "Not even once...". > > It needed a daemon! It created additional mountpoints. Just to run a program? > > That was enough to tell me it was bad design. It's the mount points I don't like seeing when I run a df command when snaps are present. (I never get the terminology right.) -- Jesus sat with sinners: He didn't sin with them. Know the difference.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-28 08:49 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <SPKPP.534546$541.133137@fx47.iad> |
| In reply to | #689582 |
On 2025-04-28 07:40, Borax Man wrote: > On 2025-04-28, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 2025-04-27, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>> On 4/27/25 02:45, RonB wrote: >>>> On 2025-04-26, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>> On 4/25/25 23:00, RonB wrote: >>>>>> On 2025-04-26, Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On 2025-04-25, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>> On Fri, 25 Apr 2025 12:06:53 -0000 (UTC), Borax Man wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I understand the problems with X11, and supporting legacy, but you can't >>>>>>>>> just throw out decades of work and break it because its hard. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Somebody has to come along and offer to do the work. If nobody does, then >>>>>>>> yes, the existing developers are quite justified in saying “that’s not >>>>>>>> worth it, let’s just drop it”. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But they ARE doing work. They're creating new stuff that lack some >>>>>>> degree of compatibility with the old. This is the problem, devs work on >>>>>>> what the want to work on, not what people need. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In no one was willing to work on free software, that would make sense, >>>>>>> but people are working on reinventing the wheel again and again. We >>>>>>> also had Mir. TWO projects. Duplication. >>>>>> >>>>>> Kind of like Ubuntu trying to force Unity on everyone because "they knew >>>>>> better." Or Gnome making huge changes in Gnome 3 because they knew better >>>>>> than the user what the *should* want. That's basically why Linux Mint took >>>>>> off. Mate and Cinnamon were what a LOT of users wanted, not Gnome 3 or >>>>>> Unity. >>>>> >>>>> In the end, a lot of people ended up liking Gnome 3's way of doing >>>>> things, and it is at the core of a few desktop environments. As for >>>>> Unity and Mir, I liked the interface of Unity enough to seek it out in >>>>> Ubuntu's iteration of Gnome, and Mir was a step in the right direction. >>>>> Had Wayland not already have been in development, I doubt people would >>>>> have had such a negative opinion of Canonical's decision to move away >>>>> from X11. >>>> >>>> Not me. Never liked either Unity or Gnome 3. I also don't like that >>>> customization of Gnome 3 was always an afterthought, with add-ons that broke >>>> with each release. Gnome developers seemed to have had a "take it or leave >>>> it," mindset. It's gotten a bit better over time but, still, when you ask >>>> about moving the top bar to the bottom, and ask why Gnome 3 doesn't a >>>> provide a method to do that, you get snarky responses claiming this the top >>>> position is "somehow" superior. I don't like it there, it feels >>>> "claustrophobic" to me. I always moved the Gnome 2 bar to the bottom. Add-ins >>>> are supposed to fix this, but usually they only work for such and such >>>> version and are often abandoned. >>> >>> You're right about the extensions. I abandoned the idea of using them >>> when I noticed that they ceased to function the moment the version of >>> Gnome increased. >>> >>>> As for X11 vs Wayland, not quite sure how that fits in the Gnome 3 and Unity >>>> vs Gnome 2 debate. >>> >>> It's not the same debate but a similar one. People hated on Mir simply >>> because Canonical introduced it. The company is apparently not allowed >>> to introduce its own technology if the community already developed >>> something similar. For example, Snap is hated even though it came out >>> before Flatpak did and is an improvement on AppImage. I'm not a fan of >>> Snap myself (I prefer Flatpak because of the software library and how it >>> updates), but I can't say that it's bad. >> >> I think the reason that people don't like Snaps is because Canonical made >> the Snap servers proprietary, under their control. It goes against the whole >> point of Linux, that it be open source. And I don't agree that Snaps are >> better than AppImages. I prefer AppImages over both Snaps and Flatpaks. >> > > I tried Snap. It brings to mind that quote about Meth, "Not even once...". > > It needed a daemon! It created additional mountpoints. Just to run a program? > > That was enough to tell me it was bad design. I'll admit that I didn't notice all of what installing Snaps did to my machine, but I could definitely tell that it was a mess. -- God be with you, CrudeSausage LibreOffice supporter John 14:6
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-28 18:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <m79u7iF2bf9U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #689600 |
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 08:49:54 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote: > I'll admit that I didn't notice all of what installing Snaps did to my > machine, but I could definitely tell that it was a mess. You don't want to run 'df -a'. I'm up to /dev/loop62 for snap stuff.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-28 20:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn100vnke.a2i.ronb02NOSPAM@3020m.home> |
| In reply to | #689611 |
On 2025-04-28, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: > On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 08:49:54 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote: > >> I'll admit that I didn't notice all of what installing Snaps did to my >> machine, but I could definitely tell that it was a mess. > > You don't want to run 'df -a'. I'm up to /dev/loop62 for snap stuff. It took me a while to root all that snap crap out of my system, but I think I've got it all cleared now. -- Jesus sat with sinners: He didn't sin with them. Know the difference.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-28 16:47 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <xPRPP.2578086$2zn8.395648@fx15.iad> |
| In reply to | #689623 |
On 2025-04-28 16:01, RonB wrote: > On 2025-04-28, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: >> On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 08:49:54 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote: >> >>> I'll admit that I didn't notice all of what installing Snaps did to my >>> machine, but I could definitely tell that it was a mess. >> >> You don't want to run 'df -a'. I'm up to /dev/loop62 for snap stuff. > > It took me a while to root all that snap crap out of my system, but I think > I've got it all cleared now. > There is a script you can use to automatically rid your system of it. A quick search on your engine of choice will find it for you. Heck, it comes up at the top of the results in Brave Search. -- God be with you, CrudeSausage LibreOffice supporter John 14:6
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-29 06:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn1010rkg.19bh.ronb02NOSPAM@3020m.home> |
| In reply to | #689632 |
On 2025-04-28, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: > On 2025-04-28 16:01, RonB wrote: >> On 2025-04-28, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: >>> On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 08:49:54 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote: >>> >>>> I'll admit that I didn't notice all of what installing Snaps did to my >>>> machine, but I could definitely tell that it was a mess. >>> >>> You don't want to run 'df -a'. I'm up to /dev/loop62 for snap stuff. >> >> It took me a while to root all that snap crap out of my system, but I think >> I've got it all cleared now. >> > > There is a script you can use to automatically rid your system of it. A > quick search on your engine of choice will find it for you. Heck, it > comes up at the top of the results in Brave Search. If I get more involved with Ubuntu I'll look it up. I was just happy to be wrong about some of my Ubuntu and Wayland assumptions. Ubuntu is not going to become my "go to" Linux distribution. It was more in the line of... "even the Linux 'flavor' I don't particularly like is pretty good." (I'm still not a fan of Gnome 3.) -- Jesus sat with sinners: He didn't sin with them. Know the difference.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-29 09:23 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <Cp4QP.2986768$t84d.1101795@fx11.iad> |
| In reply to | #689663 |
On 2025-04-29 02:15, RonB wrote: > On 2025-04-28, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >> On 2025-04-28 16:01, RonB wrote: >>> On 2025-04-28, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: >>>> On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 08:49:54 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote: >>>> >>>>> I'll admit that I didn't notice all of what installing Snaps did to my >>>>> machine, but I could definitely tell that it was a mess. >>>> >>>> You don't want to run 'df -a'. I'm up to /dev/loop62 for snap stuff. >>> >>> It took me a while to root all that snap crap out of my system, but I think >>> I've got it all cleared now. >>> >> >> There is a script you can use to automatically rid your system of it. A >> quick search on your engine of choice will find it for you. Heck, it >> comes up at the top of the results in Brave Search. > > If I get more involved with Ubuntu I'll look it up. I was just happy to be > wrong about some of my Ubuntu and Wayland assumptions. Ubuntu is not going > to become my "go to" Linux distribution. It was more in the line of... "even > the Linux 'flavor' I don't particularly like is pretty good." (I'm still not > a fan of Gnome 3.) I wasn't a fan, but I was happy to use it because I'm a fan of Ubuntu's interface. However, I won't bother with it if the contributors are proud members of Antifa. -- God be with you, CrudeSausage John 14:6
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-29 14:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn1011o35.46v.rotflol2@geidiprime.bvh> |
| In reply to | #689672 |
On 2025-04-29, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: > On 2025-04-29 02:15, RonB wrote: >> On 2025-04-28, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>> On 2025-04-28 16:01, RonB wrote: >>>> On 2025-04-28, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: >>>>> On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 08:49:54 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I'll admit that I didn't notice all of what installing Snaps did to my >>>>>> machine, but I could definitely tell that it was a mess. >>>>> >>>>> You don't want to run 'df -a'. I'm up to /dev/loop62 for snap stuff. >>>> >>>> It took me a while to root all that snap crap out of my system, but I think >>>> I've got it all cleared now. >>>> >>> >>> There is a script you can use to automatically rid your system of it. A >>> quick search on your engine of choice will find it for you. Heck, it >>> comes up at the top of the results in Brave Search. >> >> If I get more involved with Ubuntu I'll look it up. I was just happy to be >> wrong about some of my Ubuntu and Wayland assumptions. Ubuntu is not going >> to become my "go to" Linux distribution. It was more in the line of... "even >> the Linux 'flavor' I don't particularly like is pretty good." (I'm still not >> a fan of Gnome 3.) > > I wasn't a fan, but I was happy to use it because I'm a fan of Ubuntu's > interface. However, I won't bother with it if the contributors are proud > members of Antifa. > They are? Thats a concern if true. I'm not sure why Antifa are not labelled as a terrorist organisation, they fit the definition.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-29 11:24 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <xa6QP.2986769$t84d.1312598@fx11.iad> |
| In reply to | #689681 |
On 2025-04-29 10:21, Borax Man wrote: > On 2025-04-29, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >> On 2025-04-29 02:15, RonB wrote: >>> On 2025-04-28, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>> On 2025-04-28 16:01, RonB wrote: >>>>> On 2025-04-28, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 08:49:54 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I'll admit that I didn't notice all of what installing Snaps did to my >>>>>>> machine, but I could definitely tell that it was a mess. >>>>>> >>>>>> You don't want to run 'df -a'. I'm up to /dev/loop62 for snap stuff. >>>>> >>>>> It took me a while to root all that snap crap out of my system, but I think >>>>> I've got it all cleared now. >>>>> >>>> >>>> There is a script you can use to automatically rid your system of it. A >>>> quick search on your engine of choice will find it for you. Heck, it >>>> comes up at the top of the results in Brave Search. >>> >>> If I get more involved with Ubuntu I'll look it up. I was just happy to be >>> wrong about some of my Ubuntu and Wayland assumptions. Ubuntu is not going >>> to become my "go to" Linux distribution. It was more in the line of... "even >>> the Linux 'flavor' I don't particularly like is pretty good." (I'm still not >>> a fan of Gnome 3.) >> >> I wasn't a fan, but I was happy to use it because I'm a fan of Ubuntu's >> interface. However, I won't bother with it if the contributors are proud >> members of Antifa. >> > > They are? Thats a concern if true. > > I'm not sure why Antifa are not labelled as a terrorist organisation, > they fit the definition. A contributor proudly announced that Gnome is Antifa on blogs.gnome.org. -- God be with you, CrudeSausage John 14:6
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-29 21:11 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn1012g43.20o7.ronb02NOSPAM@3020m.home> |
| In reply to | #689685 |
On 2025-04-29, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: > On 2025-04-29 10:21, Borax Man wrote: >> On 2025-04-29, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>> On 2025-04-29 02:15, RonB wrote: >>>> On 2025-04-28, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>> On 2025-04-28 16:01, RonB wrote: >>>>>> On 2025-04-28, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 08:49:54 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'll admit that I didn't notice all of what installing Snaps did to my >>>>>>>> machine, but I could definitely tell that it was a mess. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You don't want to run 'df -a'. I'm up to /dev/loop62 for snap stuff. >>>>>> >>>>>> It took me a while to root all that snap crap out of my system, but I think >>>>>> I've got it all cleared now. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> There is a script you can use to automatically rid your system of it. A >>>>> quick search on your engine of choice will find it for you. Heck, it >>>>> comes up at the top of the results in Brave Search. >>>> >>>> If I get more involved with Ubuntu I'll look it up. I was just happy to be >>>> wrong about some of my Ubuntu and Wayland assumptions. Ubuntu is not going >>>> to become my "go to" Linux distribution. It was more in the line of... "even >>>> the Linux 'flavor' I don't particularly like is pretty good." (I'm still not >>>> a fan of Gnome 3.) >>> >>> I wasn't a fan, but I was happy to use it because I'm a fan of Ubuntu's >>> interface. However, I won't bother with it if the contributors are proud >>> members of Antifa. >>> >> >> They are? Thats a concern if true. >> >> I'm not sure why Antifa are not labelled as a terrorist organisation, >> they fit the definition. > > A contributor proudly announced that Gnome is Antifa on blogs.gnome.org. So is Lunduke basing his Antifa/Ubuntu connection theory on this one contributor? It should be mentioned that the word "ubuntu" had a "philosophical" (almost religious) meaning before it was used as the name for a Linux distribution. The fact that Canonical choose this name probably indicates their belief bias, but I haven't seen any evidence of an official Ubuntu/Antifa connection. If I'm wrong, point me to the link or documentation. -- Jesus sat with sinners: He didn't sin with them. Know the difference.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-29 17:33 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <VAbQP.2724172$eNx6.2590362@fx14.iad> |
| In reply to | #689706 |
On 2025-04-29 17:11, RonB wrote: > On 2025-04-29, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >> On 2025-04-29 10:21, Borax Man wrote: >>> On 2025-04-29, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>> On 2025-04-29 02:15, RonB wrote: >>>>> On 2025-04-28, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>>> On 2025-04-28 16:01, RonB wrote: >>>>>>> On 2025-04-28, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 08:49:54 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'll admit that I didn't notice all of what installing Snaps did to my >>>>>>>>> machine, but I could definitely tell that it was a mess. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You don't want to run 'df -a'. I'm up to /dev/loop62 for snap stuff. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It took me a while to root all that snap crap out of my system, but I think >>>>>>> I've got it all cleared now. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> There is a script you can use to automatically rid your system of it. A >>>>>> quick search on your engine of choice will find it for you. Heck, it >>>>>> comes up at the top of the results in Brave Search. >>>>> >>>>> If I get more involved with Ubuntu I'll look it up. I was just happy to be >>>>> wrong about some of my Ubuntu and Wayland assumptions. Ubuntu is not going >>>>> to become my "go to" Linux distribution. It was more in the line of... "even >>>>> the Linux 'flavor' I don't particularly like is pretty good." (I'm still not >>>>> a fan of Gnome 3.) >>>> >>>> I wasn't a fan, but I was happy to use it because I'm a fan of Ubuntu's >>>> interface. However, I won't bother with it if the contributors are proud >>>> members of Antifa. >>>> >>> >>> They are? Thats a concern if true. >>> >>> I'm not sure why Antifa are not labelled as a terrorist organisation, >>> they fit the definition. >> >> A contributor proudly announced that Gnome is Antifa on blogs.gnome.org. > > So is Lunduke basing his Antifa/Ubuntu connection theory on this one > contributor? > > It should be mentioned that the word "ubuntu" had a "philosophical" (almost > religious) meaning before it was used as the name for a Linux distribution. > The fact that Canonical choose this name probably indicates their belief > bias, but I haven't seen any evidence of an official Ubuntu/Antifa > connection. > > If I'm wrong, point me to the link or documentation. The connection is between Antifa and Gnome, not Ubuntu. However, this is pretty consistent with some of the things that have been reported in the past about Gnome and its woke policies. If he provides a direct link to the post eventually, I'll copy it here. -- God be with you, CrudeSausage LibreOffice supporter John 14:6
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-29 22:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn1012jpu.251e.ronb02NOSPAM@3020m.home> |
| In reply to | #689711 |
On 2025-04-29, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: > On 2025-04-29 17:11, RonB wrote: >> On 2025-04-29, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>> On 2025-04-29 10:21, Borax Man wrote: >>>> On 2025-04-29, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>> On 2025-04-29 02:15, RonB wrote: >>>>>> On 2025-04-28, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>>>> On 2025-04-28 16:01, RonB wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2025-04-28, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 08:49:54 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I'll admit that I didn't notice all of what installing Snaps did to my >>>>>>>>>> machine, but I could definitely tell that it was a mess. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You don't want to run 'df -a'. I'm up to /dev/loop62 for snap stuff. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It took me a while to root all that snap crap out of my system, but I think >>>>>>>> I've got it all cleared now. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is a script you can use to automatically rid your system of it. A >>>>>>> quick search on your engine of choice will find it for you. Heck, it >>>>>>> comes up at the top of the results in Brave Search. >>>>>> >>>>>> If I get more involved with Ubuntu I'll look it up. I was just happy to be >>>>>> wrong about some of my Ubuntu and Wayland assumptions. Ubuntu is not going >>>>>> to become my "go to" Linux distribution. It was more in the line of... "even >>>>>> the Linux 'flavor' I don't particularly like is pretty good." (I'm still not >>>>>> a fan of Gnome 3.) >>>>> >>>>> I wasn't a fan, but I was happy to use it because I'm a fan of Ubuntu's >>>>> interface. However, I won't bother with it if the contributors are proud >>>>> members of Antifa. >>>>> >>>> >>>> They are? Thats a concern if true. >>>> >>>> I'm not sure why Antifa are not labelled as a terrorist organisation, >>>> they fit the definition. >>> >>> A contributor proudly announced that Gnome is Antifa on blogs.gnome.org. >> >> So is Lunduke basing his Antifa/Ubuntu connection theory on this one >> contributor? >> >> It should be mentioned that the word "ubuntu" had a "philosophical" (almost >> religious) meaning before it was used as the name for a Linux distribution. >> The fact that Canonical choose this name probably indicates their belief >> bias, but I haven't seen any evidence of an official Ubuntu/Antifa >> connection. >> >> If I'm wrong, point me to the link or documentation. > > The connection is between Antifa and Gnome, not Ubuntu. However, this is > pretty consistent with some of the things that have been reported in the > past about Gnome and its woke policies. If he provides a direct link to > the post eventually, I'll copy it here. Okay. Thanks. -- Jesus sat with sinners: He didn't sin with them. Know the difference.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-29 19:37 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <LodQP.353393$cYP6.116521@fx08.iad> |
| In reply to | #689712 |
On 2025-04-29 18:14, RonB wrote: > On 2025-04-29, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >> On 2025-04-29 17:11, RonB wrote: >>> On 2025-04-29, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>> On 2025-04-29 10:21, Borax Man wrote: >>>>> On 2025-04-29, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>>> On 2025-04-29 02:15, RonB wrote: >>>>>>> On 2025-04-28, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2025-04-28 16:01, RonB wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 2025-04-28, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 08:49:54 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I'll admit that I didn't notice all of what installing Snaps did to my >>>>>>>>>>> machine, but I could definitely tell that it was a mess. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> You don't want to run 'df -a'. I'm up to /dev/loop62 for snap stuff. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It took me a while to root all that snap crap out of my system, but I think >>>>>>>>> I've got it all cleared now. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There is a script you can use to automatically rid your system of it. A >>>>>>>> quick search on your engine of choice will find it for you. Heck, it >>>>>>>> comes up at the top of the results in Brave Search. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If I get more involved with Ubuntu I'll look it up. I was just happy to be >>>>>>> wrong about some of my Ubuntu and Wayland assumptions. Ubuntu is not going >>>>>>> to become my "go to" Linux distribution. It was more in the line of... "even >>>>>>> the Linux 'flavor' I don't particularly like is pretty good." (I'm still not >>>>>>> a fan of Gnome 3.) >>>>>> >>>>>> I wasn't a fan, but I was happy to use it because I'm a fan of Ubuntu's >>>>>> interface. However, I won't bother with it if the contributors are proud >>>>>> members of Antifa. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> They are? Thats a concern if true. >>>>> >>>>> I'm not sure why Antifa are not labelled as a terrorist organisation, >>>>> they fit the definition. >>>> >>>> A contributor proudly announced that Gnome is Antifa on blogs.gnome.org. >>> >>> So is Lunduke basing his Antifa/Ubuntu connection theory on this one >>> contributor? >>> >>> It should be mentioned that the word "ubuntu" had a "philosophical" (almost >>> religious) meaning before it was used as the name for a Linux distribution. >>> The fact that Canonical choose this name probably indicates their belief >>> bias, but I haven't seen any evidence of an official Ubuntu/Antifa >>> connection. >>> >>> If I'm wrong, point me to the link or documentation. >> >> The connection is between Antifa and Gnome, not Ubuntu. However, this is >> pretty consistent with some of the things that have been reported in the >> past about Gnome and its woke policies. If he provides a direct link to >> the post eventually, I'll copy it here. > > Okay. Thanks. I found it through a routine search in Brave: <https://blogs.gnome.org/tbernard/2025/04/23/the-elephant-in-the-room/> Here is the paragraph: "One important thing to note is that nobody involved is against Codes of Conduct. The problem here is the Foundation’s structural dysfunction, bad leadership, and the way the CoC was used in this case as a result. I’m aware of the charged nature of the subject, and the potential for feeding right wing narratives, but I think it’s also important to not let that deter us from discussing these very real issues. But just to be extra clear: Fuck Nazis, GNOME is Antifa." -- God be with you, CrudeSausage LibreOffice supporter John 14:6
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-30 00:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vurqlr$2utdn$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #689716 |
On Tue, 29 Apr 2025 19:37:14 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote: > "But just to be extra clear: Fuck Nazis, GNOME is Antifa." Who could possibly object to that? Except perhaps closet Nazis ...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-30 00:30 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <m7d990Fib7uU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #689721 |
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 00:25:31 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote in <vurqlr$2utdn$2@dont-email.me>: > On Tue, 29 Apr 2025 19:37:14 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote: > >> "But just to be extra clear: Fuck Nazis, GNOME is Antifa." > > Who could possibly object to that? > > Except perhaps closet Nazis ... Unfortunately, they are all over the Usenet. (And some not-so-closet Nazis...) -- -v System76 Thelio Mega v1.1 x86_64 NVIDIA RTX 3090 Ti OS: Linux 6.14.4 Release: Mint 22.1 Mem: 258G "Some people act crazy, others aren't acting."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | % <pursent100@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-29 18:22 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7e-cnS-VZbL_5oz1nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #689722 |
vallor wrote: > On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 00:25:31 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro > <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote in <vurqlr$2utdn$2@dont-email.me>: > >> On Tue, 29 Apr 2025 19:37:14 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote: >> >>> "But just to be extra clear: Fuck Nazis, GNOME is Antifa." >> >> Who could possibly object to that? >> >> Except perhaps closet Nazis ... > > Unfortunately, they are all over the Usenet. > > (And some not-so-closet Nazis...) > i'm glad you support them
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-30 01:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <m7ddbdFib7uU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #689727 |
On Tue, 29 Apr 2025 18:22:30 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote in
<7e-cnS-VZbL_5oz1nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@giganews.com>:
> vallor wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 00:25:31 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>> <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote in <vurqlr$2utdn$2@dont-email.me>:
>>
>>> On Tue, 29 Apr 2025 19:37:14 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>
>>>> "But just to be extra clear: Fuck Nazis, GNOME is Antifa."
>>>
>>> Who could possibly object to that?
>>>
>>> Except perhaps closet Nazis ...
>>
>> Unfortunately, they are all over the Usenet.
>>
>> (And some not-so-closet Nazis...)
>>
> i'm glad you support them
("Unfortunately")
...clearly, reading comprehension isn't your strong suit.
ObLinux:
$ grep "^Model:" /proc/driver/nvidia/gpus/0000\:4b\:00.0/information
Model: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti
--
-v System76 Thelio Mega v1.1 x86_64 NVIDIA RTX 3090 Ti
OS: Linux 6.14.4 Release: Mint 22.1 Mem: 258G
"I'm at the corner of Walk and Don't Walk."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 9 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 … 13 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web