Hi @danGoncharuck !

Hi @am1re344 ! Welcome aboard

Hii all

i need firefox-53

http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/53.0/

good morning

good morning

riiiight... my boss woke me up at 8 in the morning, sayin they don't have internets at the office. Cleaning lady is bitch...sorry

riiiight... my boss woke me up at 8 in the morning, sayin they don't have internets at the office. Cleaning lady is bitch...sorry

Oh, come on. I'm sure she did it without any evil intention. Everybody makes faults

Oh, come on. I'm sure she did it without any evil intention. Everybody makes faults

I know, man....but still. When you're use to getting up at 10 am, phone calls at 8:30 in the morning kinda ruin everything

>Cleaning lady is bitch...sorry

Oh, sorry ^^" I misunderstood your message

hello everybody, may i ask... how can i make my own fedora repo, what should i do? i see that i should register first, am i right? :-)

whether allowed for personal use? thanks...

i need firefox-53

install firefox-esr or icecat

hello everybody, may i ask... how can i make my own fedora repo, what should i do? i see that i should register first, am i right? :-)

You have your own server? → mock mypackage.src.rpm && createrepo You don't have a server? → register on copr.fedoraproject.org

You have your own server? → mock mypackage.src.rpm && createrepo You don't have a server? → register on copr.fedoraproject.org

hmmm maybe someday i'll make myown personal server. tx for info :-)

install firefox-esr or icecat

Thats 52

And no its not really possible or recommended. Keep your browsers updated.

And no its not really possible or recommended. Keep your browsers updated.

esr and icecat is updated with security and stability updates

it just doesnt have new features

so its more stable

it just doesnt have new features

Yes. Maybe he needs a specific thing that got added in 53?

Or to mimick a clients deployed stonage system?

Why icecat is big ??

Why icecat is big ??

Shouldn't be bigger than Firefox itself?

Thats 52

i have question, what' s the different between forefox and esr version?

*firefox

i have question, what' s the different between forefox and esr version?

Esr is just extended suppirt

A company can install 52-esr and get security updates for some time while features, rendering and co stay the same.

So you can rely on certain things to stay if you have certified products against a certain firefox version and not worry about it not rendering right tomorrow.

aaah, i see .. thank you @Wolfshappen

ummm..i have a laptop with only 4gig RAM and SSD, i want to try XFS, but have no idea about the benefit and other things .. which better, XFS or EXT4 on this case?

ummm..i have a laptop with only 4gig RAM and SSD, i want to try XFS, but have no idea about the benefit and other things .. which better, XFS or EXT4 on this case?

Will Fedora be your only OS and will you never shrink the File system?

Then yes go xfs.

If you want to ever shrink it and have no external drive: ext4.

what about dualboot?

what about dualboot?

Would work too.

If you are okay with windows wiping your uefi from time to time.

If there's UEFI.

There might be Legacy as well.

yes, uefi

i'll try using xfs .. thank you

Then yes go xfs.

why not btrfs ?

why not btrfs ?

any reference about benchmarking between xfs, btrfs, ext4, zfs?

why not btrfs ?

Because its deprecated by rhel and thus likely to be removed in an upcoming fedora version.

any reference about benchmarking between xfs, btrfs, ext4, zfs?

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux-411-fs&num=1

https://openbenchmarking.org/result/1708229-TR-FILESYSTE01 ?

Because its deprecated by rhel and thus likely to be removed in an upcoming fedora version.

i heard about that too

You will get equal performance out of all of them.

Btrfs will die in RHEL based things and the fact it has its own FAQ entry for "cant access my drive, btrfs tells me all space is used even if its not" should give some red flags. Also works crap with docker/selinux.

xfs will now instead get all features of btrfs, like instant snapshots, COW....

Btrfs will die in RHEL based things and the fact it has its own FAQ entry for "cant access my drive, btrfs tells me all space is used even if its not" should give some red flags. Also works crap with docker/selinux.

aw crap

Interestingly xfs leads in pgsql bench for ssd and hdd, despite not having COW (yet).

I thought this would be exactly where btrfs would shine - but its last.

Because its deprecated by rhel and thus likely to be removed in an upcoming fedora version.

hmm, interesting - https://www.redhat.com/en/about/press-releases/red-hat-acquires-permabit-assets-eases-barriers-cloud-portability-data-deduplication-technology

hmm, interesting - https://www.redhat.com/en/about/press-releases/red-hat-acquires-permabit-assets-eases-barriers-cloud-portability-data-deduplication-technology

Yes. Thats exactly why they dropped btrfs - xfs progresses at a much faster pace, seems to be more stable as of now and is on par with selinux/docker and co. And soon gains all the btrfs goodness but raid - but thats what we have mdadm for.

It would be funny, if it's not sad

somebody didnt escape their sql

GNOME to remove advanced suspend settings and global dark theme from Tweak Tool https://jeremy.bicha.net/2017/08/29/gnome-tweaks-3-25-91/

Seems reasonable

Dark theme was a great feature not present in any other toolkit I know.

ERROR: S client not available

Dark theme was a great feature not present in any other toolkit I know.

it has gotten easier now and is still in there.

Dark mode dies and adwaita dark starts.

Adwaita-Dark is a separate theme now.

Right.

Adwaita-Dark is a separate theme now.

that doesn't separate gtk from any other toolkit that supports theming. it's a step back. the dark mode was a futuristic feature that every toolkit should have. you could always be sure that after flipping the switch you'd still have the same general design, just the colors got darker for easier use in the night. no messing around with themes, selecting from a list, just one easy switch to flip.

Can software no longer request a dark variant?

Like Totem or Builder do?

Hello good morning everyone

That seems like a valid question. Maybe ask on this blog post?

Can software no longer request a dark variant?

that I don't know, but that's not my point. I, as a fictional newbie, would prefer a simple way of flipping a switch over selecting a different theme from a list of themes. the list also includes highcontrast which makes my computer look weird.

A "simple newbie" will have a handful of GTK themes installed, so that pop-up list won't be huge. By the time they get to the Tweak tool, are they still a newbie?

I guess some distros ship it pre-installed

A "simple newbie" will have a handful of GTK themes installed, so that pop-up list won't be huge. By the time they get to the Tweak tool, are they still a newbie?

I absolutely agree the dark theme tweak needs to move out of the tweak tool and into the newbie settings

lol what are "newbie settings"?

er, where are "newbie settings"

er, where are "newbie settings"

System Settings

non-tweak tool settings

system menu → click gear icon

lots of people are suffering from eye strain during the night and don't know tweak tools exist. such a switch would impose little complexity on the user yet provide useful functionality for many

the arguments for removing it are also nonsense. they say it's because other toolkits don't support dark mode. since when is GNOME removing its innovative features just because other desktops don't have them? should hidpi support be removed because gtk2 and qt4 can't handle it?

gtk2 should vanish from most desktops soon anyway. since when does GNOME deepheartedly care about obsolete technology? they had no problems dropping support for other old software.

I see. It seems they're saying users should just pick a dark theme directly instead of relying on the "variant" system that Adwaita has in place.

I see. It seems they're saying users should just pick a dark theme directly instead of relying on the "variant" system that Adwaita has in place.

lots of third-party themes support the dark switch, too

Neat. I didn't know how that tweak worked before. But I dug through the code. It just sets a setting in ~/.config/gtk-3.0/settings.ini

Neat. I didn't know how that tweak worked before. But I dug through the code. It just sets a setting in ~/.config/gtk-3.0/settings.ini

Yes, but simultaneously with removing the switch, they will also remove the setting.

From GTK? I missed that part

I see. It seems they're saying users should just pick a dark theme directly instead of relying on the "variant" system that Adwaita has in place.

Yes, which makes it not only easier to apply and live reload changes but also more scriptable

Yes, but simultaneously with removing the switch, they will also remove the setting.

Yes. Zats good.

From GTK? I missed that part

Well, doesn't make much sense to keep the setting around if not even Adwaita supports the dark mode anymore. They're extracting the dark mode CSS to a separate theme.

Well, doesn't make much sense to keep the setting around if not even Adwaita supports the dark mode anymore. They're extracting the dark mode CSS to a separate theme.

They support it

But trough another, easier machanism