I agree about animations, apparently the setting doesn't affect gnome-shell... I'll consider a feature request of something like a setting 'bells-and-whistles', so, when disabled, Gnome accepts that user is serious about disabling all this stuff :) It shouldn't be accessible with dconf-editor though because it isn't good to scare users with such powerfull settings (just look at KDE.. boo!) On a serious note, the bug I'm trying to fix is https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=62033, requested by Zeeshan within context of https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=680195 in gnome-settings-daemon. And there was some work related to animations as well. Revisiting this I now start thinking originators won't like our approach of changing settings directly, as they already do this in gnome-settings-daemon, and just wanted an interface from spice-vdagent... On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 4:52 AM, Marc-André Lureau <mlureau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > ----- Mensaje original ----- >> Thanks for the answer, Marc-André! >> >> Few comments inline. >> >> >> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 4:27 PM, Marc-André Lureau >> <marcandre.lureau@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > >> > Hi >> > >> > On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 10:28 PM, Fedor Lyakhov <fedor.lyakhov@xxxxxxxxx> >> > wrote: >> > > Hi everyone, >> > > >> > > I've made a bit of progress on this issue - "disable wallpaper" and >> > > "disable >> > > animations" somewhat work with Gnome3. The code is very simple: >> > > >> > > static void disable_animation() >> > > { >> > > GSettings *desktop_settings = >> > > g_settings_new("org.gnome.desktop.interface"); >> > > g_settings_set_boolean(desktop_settings, "enable-animations", FALSE); >> > > } >> > > >> > > static void disable_wallpaper() >> > > { >> > > GSettings *desktop_settings = >> > > g_settings_new("org.gnome.desktop.background"); >> > > g_settings_set_boolean(desktop_settings, "draw-background", FALSE); >> > > } >> > > >> > > But looks like this isn't enough. This implementation of >> > > disable_wallpaper >> > > actually freezes current background, it is still displayed just isn't >> > > scaled >> > > properly when e.g. resolution changes. I'd love some input from anyone >> > > with >> > > Gnome3 knowledge... What's expected behavior for Spice client in this >> > > case? >> > >> > I think it is to have a solid background. >> >> I see. Turns out this is not that easy to implement with Gnome3 >> settings, but looks like I've got somewhat acceptable behavior today. >> >> > >> > >> > > Disable_animations seems to not changing things much - at least I still >> > > see >> > > some animations when opening menu or pressing Action button (top left >> > > corner). >> > >> > That doesn't surprise me. If you think that some shell animations are >> > superflous, you may want to open a bug to GNOME. >> >> Sarcasm?) Personally I find Gnome3 not practically useful, at least >> 3.6 in Fedora 18... But let's not dive into this holywar :) > > No no, I usually find GNOME3 animations quite pleasant or useful. > > I mean that in some constrained/remote environment, we may want to disable more animations in gnome-shell etc. > >> > Perhaps, although in general, you use your VM either over WAN or >> > local, but not so much switching between the two all the time. And if >> > it is the case, there are chances you prefer to have the same look and >> > feel for both cases, so not doing any changes is probably ok. >> >> I think that if we implement such intrusive behavior (changing >> look&feel of DE), we should provide a user with similar means to >> revert that... > > Perhaps it should be reverted for some users or use case. The use case I have in mind (mostly remote usage, and work environment), I believe it is not so important. ymmv > >> > Imho, you could win much more performance gains by getting back to >> > "means to detect local only" and tuning spice settings itself >> > (disabling image compression etc), not tweaking the desktop settings, >> > but hey, do what you want! :) >> >> Agree. I just don't feel too confident to dive in the internals now. >> I'm trying to address Bug62033, but looks like Gnome/Boxes guys aren't >> very interested in the solution now. It was their request for means to >> detect 'spice local or remote' - that's why I started with DBus way in >> the first place... > > > bgo #62033? not gnome-boxes (btw, the are some people behinds Boxes here :-) -- Best regards, Fedor _______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel