KNU+Kinux
this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2025
107 points (99.1% liked)
Linux
10191 readers
693 users here now
A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)
Also, check out:
Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
It’s as easy as pie too; they show up right there on the boot menu:
I really don't understand why people have this little awareness of usability. Show the freaking date normally! At least add hyphens.
We tried Dolphin and Konsole as Flatpaks for a while, but the user experience was just terrible.
Yeah I'm fairly sympathetic to Flatpak. It's way closer to how software should be installed by users. But I have yet to actually use it successfully. Is it really ready?
I really don’t understand why people have this little awareness of usability.
It's an alpha release.
Is it really ready?
It's an alpha release.
It’s an alpha release.
You really think they're going to revisit this? That's not really how software development works.
It’s an alpha release.
I was talking about Flatpak.
You really think they’re going to revisit this?
I reserve my judgement until a final release is made.
That’s not really how software development works.
How does it work, then? Have you filed a bug report?
How does it work, then?
I'm assuming that's a genuine question... Normally when people develop a feature they do it once and then it's "done" and any changes to that feature have to go through the whole feature request -> it's low priority -> wait 10 years cycle before they actually happen.
Essentially, you have to do it right first time or it might never be fixed.
Normally when people develop a feature they do it once and then it’s “done”
The feature (boot manager) was not developed by KDE. They rely in systemd components which are all in active development.
So did you file a bug report or are you just being negative in a forum the developers will probably never read?
Right but presumably they chose the names?
So did you file a bug report
It's not a requirement to file a bug report before you comment on anything. Don't be silly.
Right but presumably they chose the names?
I don't know.
It’s not a requirement to file a bug report before you comment on anything. Don’t be silly.
It's not a requirement but if anything is silly it's acting as if an alpha version is the final release and complaining in a random forum would change anything.
complaining in a random forum would change anything.
What gave you the impression that I thought it would?
What gave you the impression that I thought it would?
What gave the completely irrational impression that filing a bug report before commenting was a requirement?
Your tedious query if I had filed a bug report.
YYYYMMDDHHmm is probably one of the most normal date-time formats, only slightly behind current ISO 8601. But adding hyphens for the extended format would definitely make it more readable.
YYYYMMDDHHmm is probably one of the most normal date-time formats
No, it absolutely isn't outside the tech sphere
Not for normal people.
It's really not unless you're a techie who's used to naming files in away that promotes better sorting.
The date format this uses should match with the one you have set in your system, which for most people will be DD/MM/YYYY or MM/DD/YYYY in the US. Because that's what the user is used to seeing.
If you think most people are used to seeing YYMMDDhhmmss then you are in a very tiny and very incorrect bubble lol
Booting to a black screen with white text, while functional, really detracts from the more professional experiences that can be had elsewhere. I know the theming support is severely lacking in systemd-boot though (which I believe this is)
I don't interact with either of following systems KDE Linux, atomic fedora and opensuse (aeon). What is the difference between them? How can I choose between them?
I used a fedora distrobox for a long time. I couldn't figure out how to upgrade many times. Now, I use aeon with a rolling opensuse distrobox. And I don't have to think about upgrading again. I am not too sure why I didn't think of that before (probably because I didn't care too much).
Note that Homebrew packages are not segregated, so they can override system libraries and present problems. This should be considered an experts’ tool.
To me as an end user it translates to: don't touch brew. what about nix home manager? Is nix as dangerous as brew?
There’s no package manager.
I'm confused. It's based on arch but not really? Is it arch based or not? Does it use any arch package manager? The post raises a number of new questions
I'm confused. It's based on arch but not really? Is it arch based or not? Does it use any arch package manager? The post raises a number of new questions
The answers to that seem pretty obvious to me: yes, it is based on arch. No, it does not come with a package manager. Presumably, they use Arch packaging tools and package definitions behind the scenes in some way, but the end result is a premade immutable system image.
OFF TOPIC, but, how do you do the stand-out quotes like that?
Like this:
> Quote
>
> Second paragraph of quote
Quote
Second paragraph of quote
Note that it's standard markdown syntax, and also that the contents of the quote are also markdown and should support standard formatting (including nesting quotes inside them)
It's been standard since the early days of email and Usenet.
Not entirely sure what you're referring to, but if you mean that it's not only markdown, absolutely - what's immediately relevant here is that it is markdown we're using here, which can be used to look up formatting and is useful to know where else this syntax will work.
Just that that quoting convention has been used forever.
We all saw this coming