KDE 4.6 released

Posted Jan 31, 2011 0:45 UTC (Mon) by jackb (guest, #41909)
In reply to: KDE 4.6 released by dlang
Parent article: KDE 4.6 released

For even more fun try using the same .kde directory on two different machines (shared NFS home directory) where one machine has two monitors and the other one only has a single monitor.

KDE 4.6 released

Posted Jan 31, 2011 8:11 UTC (Mon) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] (2 responses)

Yeah, well, nobody seems to care about shared NFS homes anymore. I still don't know how to get all this semantic search stuff working if your $HOME is NFS-shared...

KDE 4.6 released

Posted Jan 31, 2011 15:05 UTC (Mon) by jackb (guest, #41909) [Link] (1 responses)

I'd just be happy if all the widgets would show up.

On my primary machine most of my work is done on screen 2 due to the peculiarities of how the graphics card numbers the output ports. When I try to use the same profile on a machine that only has one screen the taskbar doesn't show up because it's configured to be on screen 2. The fact that screen 2 doesn't exist makes no difference to how KDE decides to layout the widgets.

I imagine the same thing would happen if you were working multiheaded and removed a monitor for some reason. If you didn't remember to move everything around beforehand you'd be out of luck.

KDE 4.6 released

Posted Jan 31, 2011 23:35 UTC (Mon) by aseigo (guest, #18394) [Link]

"the taskbar doesn't show up because it's configured to be on screen 2."

that should be fixed in 4.6 where such panels automigrate to an existing screen if there is no panel already there.

"The fact that screen 2 doesn't exist makes no difference to how KDE decides to layout the widgets."

primarily because there is no established "correct behavior": should all the desktop widgets be migrated to screen 0? well, that would likely mess up the widgets that are there.

the other gotcha is that plasma-desktop relies on the xserver to consistently number the screens in a sensible fashion. during screen changes such as the one you describe, it often doesn't. whichever way we chose to interpret those numbers, it'll be the "wrong" behaviour on some number of machines. :/