Para_lyzed

The linked article does a great job explaining the process of creating a theme assuming you have the SVG files. If you are asking how to create SVG files, then just use any vector editor (like Inkscape, for instance). You can find plenty of tutorials on how to create vectors through online video tutorials.

Sorry for the late reply, I’m not on Lemmy often.

It seems that, according to a Reddit thread, the Nobara kernel should include support for ec_sys. What does the command modinfo ec_sys output? If it doesn’t return modinfo: ERROR: Module ec_sys not found., then you should just be able to enable it with sudo modprobe ec_sys and then enable it persistently across reboots with echo ec_sys | sudo tee -a /etc/modules

EDIT: Replaced output redirection with sudo tee in case you are not running the command as root.

I’m not really sure what it is you’re asking for here. As another commenter said, ps outputs a list of newline separated entries (using \n, the standard LF character). I even ran some sanity checks to make sure it wasn’t using \r\n (CR LF) with the following:

$ ps aux | grep $USER | tr -cd "\n" | wc -m
14
$ ps aux | grep $USER | tr -cd "\r" | wc -m
0

The output of ps aux | grep $USER is consistent with the formatting of ps aux. I also found that ps aux | grep $USER was consistent with ps -fp $(pgrep -d, -u $USER) except that ps -fp $(pgrep -d, -u $USER) shows the header (UID PID PPID C STIME TTY TIME CMD), does not show the processes related to the command (entries of ps aux and grep --color=auto $USER), and does not show grep’s keyword matching by highlighting all matches within a line. It is otherwise completely identical.

Can you provide the output that you are getting that is unsatisfactory to you? I don’t think I can otherwise understand where the issue is.

Can you paste the output of the build so we can see what specific package it is missing? Qt is not a single package, and it’s very likely that you need the developer package qt-devel and its associated libraries to build, not just the base package.

Just a thought, but since someone else in the thread said you can stream to Chromecast via VLC, you can desktop capture natively in VLC and stream that to your Chromecast. I can’t remember if the native capture can do sound or not, but if not, you can instead use OBS virtual cam (you’ll need v4l2loopback for the virtual cam to show up), and open that as a capture device in VLC. You should be able to attach an audio source to that as well. While I haven’t personally tested it with audio, I have used OBS virtual cam with VLC before, and it worked flawlessly for me. If you can’t find a more elegant solution, then it’s worth a shot to try and see if it works

While I haven’t personally tried it, I’ve heard people have issues with cooling when using the M.2 hat, especially when using their Pi for intensive applications (like hosting a Minecraft server). I’d honestly recommend just getting a 2.5" USB drive enclosure and an SSD. Costs about the same amount of money without the drawback of poor cooling. You can use it with any case, since it just connects via USB. I have been running my Pi this way for years (in fact I have never used an SD card in it).

I am also experiencing this issue on Fedora 40 with the Negativo drivers, and I believe this is a flatpak issue. Here is a GitHub issue detailing the problem. Allegedly it has been fixed, but I have updated to the latest commit and am still having the same issue, so I am unsure what to do (I’ve spent a number of hours trying to troubleshoot this). You might have luck just running a flatpak update, as that is supposed to solve this issue (YMMV though, it didn’t fix it for me).

No, here is the official RPMFusion documentation for it, which is linked to in the Nvidia driver documentation from RPMFusion.

Oh, on second look I suppose you are correct. Silverblue and Kinoite kept their names, but Sericea and Onyx (and all future spins) use the Fedora [DE] Atomic structure. I was under the impression based on the announcement that all of them followed that naming structure, since they are collectively referred to as Fedora Atomic Desktop spins now. That actually seems much weirder than having changed them all to the same structure, because it was intended to lessen confusion, but now half of the spins use a different naming scheme than the other? Strange choice imo.

Here’s the announcement I was referring to.

Fedora KDE Atomic Fedora Kinoite

Matrix leaks tons of metadata, and its encryption lacks perfect forward secrecy. Additionally, it requires an email to sign up, and there are accounts with unique identifiers.

Simplex does not have any accounts or identifiers, everything is stored entirely locally. Additionally, it is based on the double ratchet Signal protocol, with improvements made for post-quantum encryption. It does not require anything to sign up, as there are no accounts. Metadata is not leaked as it is with Matrix, as everything is encrypted or obscured. Messages are padded to 16KB, the sender/receiver is not attached to the message, and there are fake messages being sent to obscure the identity and frequency of contact of those you are talking to even under monitoring of your network. Additionally, for anonymity, SimpleX is allowing for repudiation so that you cannot prove that a specific person sent specific messages, allowing doubt if messages were to be use in a court case, for instance. It is the trend (especially from a security perspective) to implement nonrepudiation, but the SimpleX team decided to remove it to protect users (after years of it being present in SimpleX chat). This is a protection intended for journalists, but it extends to many other cases as well.

Matrix is a nice toy, but SimpleX chat is built for anonymity above all else, and it does that job far better than Matrix ever has or will.

The partition manager should be KDE Partition Manager on the KDE Bazzite, and Disks on the GNOME Bazzite (I don’t think GParted is installed by default)

The flowchart is as follows:

LibreOffice or OnlyOffice for desktop apps (no, they are not Microsoft apps, but yes they use Microsoft formats and can edit and save Microsoft documents/spreadsheets/etc). OnlyOffice is the closest of the two to the Windows experience.

If you really aren’t open to using alternative software (which is strange given that you’re using Linux), then the web apps exist. I’ve heard they’re really close to the actual desktop suite, though I don’t have any interest in ever using them as we have very good free and open source alternatives available (see above).

If the web apps don’t cut it for you, then you can run the official apps in a VM, or maybe through WINE. Here’s the WINE DB page for Microsoft Office, which lists various Office versions and their level of compatibility through WINE.

Copilot will likely not be possible to secure on Linux in a standalone desktop app (unless someone somewhere hacked something together through Electron to use a web version). Another user said that Copilot is available inside Microsoft Edge, so I suppose you could install that, though I’d highly discourage that. Reliance on LLMs is quite frankly a plague to society, and often feeds incorrect, biased, or purely fabricated responses, as LLMs merely attempt to predict what word is most likely to occur next based on a set of training data, none of which was vetted for accuracy, racism, zionism, sexism, etc. LLMs like copilot do not have any form of intelligence, and do not understand what they are saying. I highly recommend you just use a search engine in your browser, because it’ll feed you the same info all the LLMs were trained on anyway.

OneDrive recently received native support in GNOME, so I think you should be able to access it in your settings under accounts/connected services (whatever GNOME calls it nowadays)? I’ve never tried to use it, so other people will know better than I will there, but it should be possible to use.

Did you check the MD5sum? If you did (and it actually matches), try using a different media creator. You can use something like Rufus or Fedora Media Writer (yes, you can install non-Fedora ISOs with it, the only extra feature it has is that it will automatically download Fedora ISOs you want). If other media creation tools don’t work, try a different flash drive, as that’s the next most likely issue.

The only reason that the Fedora Project exists is for community development. There is simply nothing Red Hat could ever stand to gain from changing that model, as they’d lose the entirety of what they are paying for by sponsoring the project. In order to do anything, they’d first need to dissolve FESCo, which would make HUGE waves across the internet. You and anyone else in the community would see news and posts about it immediately. Once that happens, the project dies. Community members are not going to contribute to a project that betrays their trust, after all. So in trying to change anything, the only thing Red Hat would be doing is moving a project that they are paying a relatively small amount of money for (relative to the number of contributors) from community developed to Red Hat developed. That means that they have to personally invest money into maintaining and employing contributors themselves, completely defeating the point of Fedora existing in the first place. If they wanted to privately fund development, why wouldn’t they instead do it in RHEL, or CentOS Stream?

Let’s analyze Red Hat’s current gains from Fedora one by one:

1. Fedora is a place for Red Hat to test new features before they move to RHEL.

This requires an active userbase, and by privatizing or taking over the project, that userbase would rapidly diminish. Red Hat cannot increase this benefit by any means, other than by leaving the project be as is.

2. Fedora is community developed, so Red Hat can benefit from commits made by the community (people they don’t pay).

Privatizing or taking over the Fedora Project would immediately end that community development. There’s nothing in this respect that Red Hat could possibly intend to gain from such an action.

3. Red Hat’s image appears better by sponsoring a community developed project.

It should go without saying that their image would only be damaged if they tried to modify their current relationship.

These are the things that Red Hat is paying for by sponsoring the Fedora Project. A hostile takeover would have exactly zero potential gain and very high potential losses in each of these categories; thus it doesn’t make sense in the slightest.

Now let’s analyze some new potential gains that Red Hat could get by a hostile takeover:

1. Monetizing Fedora.

This is Linux we’re talking about, attempting to sell a consumer Linux distro for money will not fly, and no one will buy it. After all, even when enterprises by RHEL licenses, they aren’t paying for the software itself. What they’re really paying for is the support package and direct hotline to Red Hat for any technical difficulties. Red Hat makes its money by offering support services, something that does not have any realistic market for the general populace, especially considering the userbase we’re talking about are Linux users.

2. That’s really it.

There’s just nothing else Red Hat would even stand to gain from any hostile takeover. The only potential motive is money, and Fedora is not a product that will ever generate them revenue. Consumers don’t want to purchase licenses, and enterprises don’t want consumer desktop distros with 6 month release cycles.

Red Hat funds Fedora because it is of great benefit to them to keep it alive, and continue its development by the community. Changing their relationship with the Fedora Project would not only lose the exact benefits they are receiving, but also cost them money, as they will no longer have thousands of community members volunteering their work, and they would have to hire contributors to fill that gap. Additionally, why even bother speculating? It isn’t difficult to move distros nowadays, so if anything ever were to change, you can jump ship on any day of the week to another distro. We seem to live in a world where logic is challenged by a thousand “but what if?” statements that have no basis in reality. It’s quite a pointless endeavor, honestly. What if the distro you choose gets bought out by Google, or Microsoft? What if the distro you choose is secretly funding antisemitism with donation money? What if the distro you choose suddenly dies? These are all absurd questions to speculate on, all to no real end. They each have the very simple solution of “just install a different distro if that happens”. But what if a company tries to exploit a distro for money? There’s no point in even speculating that because there isn’t even any money to be made from consumer desktop distros. The money to be made from Linux is not in the consumer desktop platform, it is in the realm of businesses (enterprise software, embedded systems). There are far too many free options out there owned by nonprofits to ever consider marketing a consumer Linux distro like that. Even with stuff like Ubuntu Pro, you aren’t paying for a license to the distro; you’re paying for extra support.

Why are we treating Red Hat like the most evil company in the world, anyway? As far as tech companies go, they’re pretty damn ethically sound. They’re not nearly as bad as Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Apple, IBM, or any number of other tech companies that release proprietary software with no access to source code, massively violate their users privacy, exploit consumers in harmful ad campaigns, etc. Google, one of the most unethical companies in the world owns Android, but we still have AOSP, which is the foundation for custom ROMs like GrapheneOS and LineageOS. If they believed that trying to shut down AOSP would make them money, they would have tried it years ago. Of course, doing so wouldn’t even be legal, as it would be violating GPL.

I’m just not seeing what exactly you’re imagining Red Hat could take away from Fedora for their own gain. Nothing they could do that would have a negative effect on users would result in a gain for Red Hat, as they’d be losing everything they gain from the Fedora Project. In order to make any changes to the development of Fedora, they either have to pay developers to make those changes, or convince community members to do it for them (which is not going to happen if these changes are negative), and that’s assuming that they manage to dissolve FESCo to get these malicious changes approved.

You don’t want to rely on a project that’s funded by corporations? Where do you think the funding for the Linux Foundation comes from? Companies like Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and IBM fund the Linux Foundation, so any OS that uses the Linux kernel will be financially dependent on corporations. That’s something you’re never going to be able to avoid.

I don’t understand why this has been blown so far out of proportion. What’s the point in excluding a very good distro that suits your needs perfectly over a fear that some day, somehow, in the indeterminate future, that there would be some new financial incentive created out of thin air that would cause Red Hat to try to take over Fedora? What guarantees that same situation or one similar wouldn’t happen to any other distro you could choose? And to that end, why would Red Hat take over Fedora instead of creating a new fork that they could sell so they can still get all those benefits of community development? I don’t see how any financial incentive created by Fedora wouldn’t be possible to gain downstream.

There’s a question that I feel I don’t adequately answer in my previous comments, but I feel as if I should address.

Does Red Hat implement their own features in Fedora, and what does that mean for the community?

The short answer is yes, there are Red Hat developers who do work on Fedora. Just as Canonical developers contribute to Debian, Red Hat contributes to Fedora. There is a very important distinction between the development of Fedora and RHEL though, and it’s the same reason no one is up in arms about Canonical contributing to Debian. The changes that Red Hat makes to Fedora still have to be approved by FESCo, so they still have to represent the interests of the community. Red Hat can feel free to pay as much as they like into the development of features, but if those features would contradict the values of the Fedora Project or go against the wishes of the community, they wouldn’t be approved in the first place. Red Hat sees Fedora as a very valuable resource that they can use to test features before they arrive in RHEL. Unlike Canonical, however, they don’t push proprietary solutions, tracking, or pro subscriptions into a consumer desktop platform. Those changes would not be representative of the wants of the community, and would not be approved by FESCo (hence the benefit of a community elected board).

There’s a related follow-up, as well:

Are there Red Hat developers in FESCo? What does that mean for Fedora?

Yes, there are a few Red Hat developers in FESCo, you can view their bios on the Fedora Project website. They were not placed there by Red Hat, however. These are still people that were elected by the community, who would not be there unless users (and other developers) trusted them to make decisions in the interest of the community. You can nominate and vote in the elections as part of the community if you wish.

The biggest factor that I often see glossed over (and perhaps the most important reason Fedora has independence) is that Red Hat doesn’t have any reason to even attempt to corrupt it. Fedora users are not an audience they stand to make money from, and if Red Hat believed there was money to be had in the consumer desktop platform, they would already be selling a product. There is mutual benefit between Red Hat and the Fedora Project, and that gets passed onto the community. Red Hat benefits from the contributions of the community, while simultaneously being able to test new features in an audience that they aren’t interested in selling to, and the Fedora Project gets money and active development back from Red Hat as a result.

Now I’d also like to clarify, because I could understand confusion as to what I meant when I said Red Hat doesn’t control the Fedora Project. Red Hat is allowed to make contributions to Fedora, so long as they meet the same approval criteria as any other merge request from any other person/entity. Red Hat, however, is not able to control how money is spent, or where the priorities of community developers are focused (the direction of the project). So they are free to make contributions to Fedora that benefit everyone (so long as their changes are approved), but not free to test RHEL specific features that don’t have a place in Fedora, for example. In fact, since Red Hat wants to keep their source code away from anyone that doesn’t pay them a subscription, they actually have a vested interest in keeping those RHEL specific features separate from Fedora, as to not make them easily accessible to potential competitors. This is how they’re addressing the competition posed by Rocky/Alma/Oracle Linux.

Excluding Fedora because it’s “too close to RH” doesn’t make any sense at all. Fedora is not controlled by or influenced by Red Hat, and Red Hat has no interest in a consumer desktop platform that they can’t sell. Fedora’s development is managed by FESCo, a community elected board that represents the interests of the community. They are kept intentionally separate from Red Hat’s development, and do not make any effort to target their development to Red Hats wants or needs (in fact they often do the opposite, as Fedora pushes for change in the way things are done, not stability, as can be seen by the exclusion of X11 from Fedora 40, for example). That stands in direct contradiction with RHEL’s goals. Red Hat’s entire business is in enterprise. There is exactly $0 in potential revenue from Red Hat trying to take over Fedora, it just doesn’t make sense. They can’t sell anything, and since Red Hat doesn’t employ the developers, such a takeover would simply result in a new fork. In fact, it would be against their interests, as Red Hat actively benefits from the developments of the community. Taking over control of the project would lose them all of the constant volunteer work put in by the community, which costs far less for them to sponsor than it would to employ a team a fraction of the size on salary. I’ve discussed this topic at length many times before, so I’ll just link to a few comments that explain the situation in more detail (including how the project is funded, managed, and separated from Red Hat).

https://lemmy.world/comment/7490965

https://lemmy.world/comment/7494803

The best fit for your criteria is Fedora. If you want uBlue spins, you’re still getting Fedora, just a more opinionated version. All of the major development of uBlue’s images comes from Fedora though, as they don’t maintain their own distro, they just repackage Fedora.

Sounds like a fractional scaling issue. Keep the scaling at 100% to avoid those kinds of issues

Oh, very strange. Glad you got it figured out!

The remote input issue is related to Wayland, and currently all wlroots based compositors (including Hyperland) have issues with this. KDE Plasma has merged support for remote input to work with KDE Connect, however many other DEs do not have the support merged, and will have to rely on xdg-desktop-portal-wlr to implement it. Here are the related bug reports and issues:

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=448604

https://github.com/emersion/xdg-desktop-portal-wlr/issues/2

https://github.com/hyprwm/Hyprland/issues/1775

Also, it seems the other issue is unrelated, are you seeing an error on the command line, or is there a dialog popup, and can you quote what is said? I’m having trouble finding any related issues anywhere on GitHub, even the Hyperland issues around remote desktop did not seem to have this particular error (or didn’t mention it at least).