Description of problem: Ever since upgrading to Fedora 19 I do not have a desktop with my own background image but with a grey-ish background underneath the icons Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): gnome-shell-3.8.3-3.fc19.x86_64 How reproducible: Run Fedora 19 with 'have file manager handle the desktop' enabled as that makes the desktop usable. Actual results: Grey background instead of selected image Expected results: No grey background but selected image Additional info: This is on AMD A10-5800K with ARUBA Cayman-style GPU. When I right-click the desktop to edit the background the correct image that I chose is shown. When using the 'windows' key to use the menu I also see the correct background. This issue happens when running radeon (ati) r600 video driver from git but *also* when using llvmpipe (swrast) driver.
gnome-shell-3.8.4-2.fc19.x86_64 does not fix this issue. (I restarted the shell after updating) Why isn't the 'handled' status the default? I.e.: what use is a desktop when there's no stuff on it?
Not having icons on the desktop anymore is a design decision. Using the desktop as a place to store things is a bad idea as most of the time it's hidden by windows anyway. http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_uDrMMyFxly8/TLIUTo710-I/AAAAAAAAAWM/nO1n_il4r2Q/s400/Cluttered+Desktop.jpg is also a good example of how icons on the desktop can be (and often is) abused.
http://jeff.ecchi.ca/blog/2010/07/25/desktop-in-the-shell/ gives more details.
Please fix the bug. I.e. do not remove the feature saying it is a design decision, but make it work again as it did in Fedora 17. Thank you. What logging, etc, can I provide to help you?
The link in Comment 3 is weird attempt at convincing me to get rid of gnome, thus that is not helpful to the project. How you populate the desktop is your fault. Starting to write about a feature instead of fixing the bug is weird. This is basic desktop functionality that has been in GUIs since ages. Of course you need to take time for all the other important stuff, but failing basic stuff is more important in my eyes than new features. So what can I do to help this bug to get fixed? What logging, etc, can I provide to help you?
(In reply to udo from comment #5) > So what can I do to help this bug to get fixed? Assuming https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=706665, this has been fixed a while ago ... *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1001051 ***
What do I need to install to fix the issue?
Also: this bug was earlier so it is a duplicate?
(In reply to udo from comment #8) > Also: this bug was earlier so it is a duplicate? The point is: - gnome-shell does nothing special regarding the background when showing desktop icons - desktop icons are implemented in the file manager by opening a fullscreen window of type DESKTOP - if a window is supposed to have a transparent background, the corresponding application needs to request it this way So the fix needs to be in nautilus, not gnome-shell. If you are anal about bug numbers, feel free to add a reference to the upstream bug here, reassign to nautilus and mark the other as dupe.
> So the fix needs to be in nautilus, not gnome-shell. Thank you for explaining this issue.
The fix for bug 1001051 did not help the non-Classic (gnome-shell) issue of the grey background when the file manager (nautilus) handles the desktop. So I am unsure where the problem lies. What can I do to help find the root cause?
fedora 20 + oxygen-gtk make it happen again :(
Problem persists in fedora 20: $ rpm -q nautilus nautilus-3.10.1-3.fc20.x86_64 Please fix.
Any updates? Stuff we can try to help find the root cause?
What logs do you need to fix this bug? $ rpm -q nautilus nautilus-3.10.1-4.fc20.x86_64
bug still present in fedora 21 (rawhide - 09/06/2014) when nautilus used with oxygen-gtk
Lets move this bug to where the fix is needed, then
Euh... $ rpm -ql oxygen-gtk package oxygen-gtk is not installed $
try instead: rpm -q oxygen-gtk2 oxygen-gtk3
$ rpm -q oxygen-gtk2 oxygen-gtk3 package oxygen-gtk2 is not installed package oxygen-gtk3 is not installed $
It would appear comment #16 isn't valid (for all reporters here at least). Back to nautilus.
(In reply to udo from comment #20) > $ rpm -q oxygen-gtk2 oxygen-gtk3 > package oxygen-gtk2 is not installed > package oxygen-gtk3 is not installed > $ But are you using Adwaita? If not, than a theme issue still seems likely (just one that is not exclusive to oxygen-gtk) ...
$ rpm -qa|grep adw adwaita-gtk3-theme-3.10.0-2.fc20.x86_64 adwaita-gtk2-theme-3.10.0-2.fc20.x86_64 adwaita-cursor-theme-3.10.0-2.fc20.noarch But I believe I use clearlooks: $ rpm -qa|grep clear clearlooks-phenix-gtk3-theme-3.0.15-2.fc20.noarch clearlooks-phenix-common-3.0.15-2.fc20.noarch clearlooks-phenix-gtk2-theme-3.0.15-2.fc20.noarch clearlooks-phenix-metacity-theme-3.0.15-2.fc20.noarch $
gnome-tweak-tool shows: theme Window Clearlooks-Phenix GTK+ Clearlooks-Phenix Icons Gnome Cursor Adwaita
Which theme is relvant? I could try to select an other theme to see if that fixes the situation..
Please try Adwaita as GTK+ theme
Did so. Restarted the gnome shell. No change.
Any more tests I could do? Any progress?
What tests I could do? What progress can we achieve? $ rpm -qa|grep clear clearlooks-phenix-common-5.0.7-1.fc20.noarch clearlooks-phenix-gtk3-theme-5.0.7-1.fc20.noarch clearlooks-phenix-metacity-theme-5.0.7-1.fc20.noarch clearlooks-phenix-gtk2-theme-5.0.7-1.fc20.noarch $ rpm -qa|grep adw adwaita-gtk3-theme-3.10.0-2.fc20.x86_64 adwaita-gtk2-theme-3.10.0-2.fc20.x86_64 adwaita-cursor-theme-3.10.0-2.fc20.noarch $ rpm -q nautilus nautilus-3.10.1-4.fc20.x86_64 Anything else?
$ rpm -q gnome-shell gnome-shell-3.10.4-9.fc20.x86_64 Perhaps?
Still the same when using oxygen-gtk. Screenshot here: http://pccito.ugr.es/~gustavo/bug/993550.png Now on Fedora 21 (updated today). [gustavo@pccito ~]$ rpm -qa | grep clear [gustavo@pccito ~]$ rpm -qa | grep adw adwaita-gtk2-theme-3.14.2.2-1.fc21.x86_64 adwaita-icon-theme-3.14.1-1.fc21.noarch adwaita-cursor-theme-3.14.1-1.fc21.noarch [gustavo@pccito ~]$ rpm -q nautilus nautilus-3.14.2-1.fc21.x86_64 [gustavo@pccito ~]$ rpm -q gnome-shell gnome-shell-3.14.3-1.fc21.x86_64 [gustavo@pccito ~]$ uname -a [gustavo@pccito ~]$ cat /etc/fedora-release Fedora release 21 (Twenty One)
killing nautilus background came back
Suddenly, after booting into 3.18.2 that I compiled, the grey background is gone. I cannot correlate this (yet) to recently updated RPMs.
This message is a reminder that Fedora 20 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 4 (four) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 20. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '20'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version. Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not able to fix it before Fedora 20 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora, you are encouraged change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete.
No deep insights? Questions?
And the problem is back after updating to fedora 22.
Fedora 20 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2015-06-23. Fedora 20 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this bug. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.