HOME | DD
kjeksomanen — Arch Linux desktop - KDE 4.7
Published: 2011-10-24 19:24:58 +0000 UTC; Views: 11994; Favourites: 20; Downloads: 334
Redirect to original
Description
What:Current desktop on one of my computers. Running Arch Linux with KDE 4.7 after being sick of Unity and Gnome 3.
Just started using it, so it still feels a little bit alien to use.
Why:
Finally got a SSD (Crucial M4 64 GB), so got my main desktop computer up and running again with newly gained power! Been using Ubuntu for half a year now, and it's effective to work with, but it's not very good looking.
On the other hand I have Gnome 3.2 on my laptop with Arch Linux as well, but that's just good looking, but impossible to be effective with..
Therefore I had to try something new, and *box-setups doesn't seem like something I could use for everyday-use, so a friend told me to try KDE
How:
Desktop theme: Caledonia [link]
Window decoration: Zink [link]
Application style: Oxygen, shipped with KDE 4.7
Application colors: Obsidian Coast, a little modified
Icons: the lovely kAwOken [link]
Fonts: Ubuntu Fonts [link]
Splash screen: Caledonia-KSplash [link]
Wallpaper: Deep Love Wallpaper [link]
Related content
Comments: 29
I used to avoid Arch Linux because of the lack of package signing, but Wikipedia says that Arch Linux has had package signing by default since 2012.
Paste from Wikipedia:
Until pacman version 4.0.0 [19] Arch Linux's package manager lacked support for signed packages. [20] Packages and metadata were not verified for authenticity by pacman during the download-install process. Without package authentication checking, tampered-with or malicious repository mirrors can compromise the integrity of a system. [21] Pacman 4 allowed verification of the package database and packages, but it was disabled by default. In November 2011 package signing became mandatory for new package builds, and as of 21 March 2012 every official package is signed. [22]
In June 2012, package signing verification became official and is now enabled by default in the installation process. [23] [24]
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That is correct, I remember there being quite a bit of drama about the lack of signing. I started using Arch before they introduced signed packages, but at the time I didn't really think about it too much. Didn't have much experience back then anyway.
Ultimately though, I changed from Arch to Debian not because of their lack of respect for security, but the constant flow of odd changes that require manual intervention. While I never broke my install completely, it felt unnecessary and a waste of time. In my ways I've become more lazy when it comes to maintaining my setups after changing to Debian (testing), simply because you rarely ever need to do anything and apt-listbugs takes care of the rest.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Sure, but it's basically Obsidian Coast (as mentioned) with a few modifications in the colors. I've uploaded my .colors-file here [link] - you can put it in ~/.kde4/share/apps/color-schemes/ and it should appear in System Settings - Application Appearance - Colors
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah it's a great wallpaper for sure!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh, I know. I was just saying. lol
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Looks really good, glad that you like my work and have used it
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Beautiful! Wish you were using a *box WM so we could feature this on
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That would be great! In the meanwhile, you are welcome to join us as a member
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well sure, why not!
Going to switch out Ubuntu and Unity on my homeserver eventually, so maybe I'll bless it with a *box-WM!
Currently a bit sceptical using *box for everyday use from what I've seen. Don't know how well it'll perform on dualscreen, border snapping, styling of programs and fonts on GTK etc. Haven't read much about it yet though, only checked those pretty screenshots for inspiration!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I use Blackbox for Windows, so my opinion is somehow biased... lol. But from what Linux users have told me, most of the things you describe do work under Blackbox for Linux. I prefer Linux to Windows anytime, but the reason I use Windows is that Blackbox for Windows offers options that would look futuristic to a Linux user. Anyway, we'd love to have you with us
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ah ok I see
What exactly do you mean with "offers options taht would look futuristic to a Linux user."? Features only available in Windows? Better experienced in Windows?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
By Linux user I meant Blackbox Linux user, of course. Like split graphics. Or outline text. Or shadows. Or icons and separators on the menus. Or volume bar on the menus. Or a plugin like bbinterface that helps you create anything, from a sidebar to a music player to a wharf just with a few mouse clicks. Maybe you should try it?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'm sorry but there's no way I'm going back to Windows in the near future on my private computers. Much more efficient in Linux than Windows
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I completely agree. Only reason I use Windows myself is Blackbox for Windows. Would terribly miss it if I went back to Linux
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
There are positive and negative things with both Windows and Linux, and I guess you value the ones that are positive in Windows more than you value those that are positive in Linux, and that's fair!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Actually, I don't see many positive things in Windows. If it weren't for BB4Win, I don't think I'd personally use the OS for a number of reasons.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Is that so
I can't imagine staying in Windows just because of the customization-experience, since Linux got a lot of different options for that aswell.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
True, but I am a Blackbox themer and the Windows version is much superior
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Too bad, the linux-side always need more people
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I will install Linux on one of my other 3 computers, so I will be in touch.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1