I believe linux specific development of picasa ceased with the last
issued beta package. The "linux" version was just a "tweaked" version of
wine packaged with the (maybe tweeked) windows version of picasa, there
is really no reason to continue linux development. iianm, there was no
intention to build a native linux version anyway.
The latest windows version of picasa, 3.6, installs and runs fine with
the recent wine versions. Try it, you will see little difference to the
older "linux" versions other than improved functionality.
--
Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA HOG # US1244711
http://wahoo.no-ip.org Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2
Registered Linux User #207535 @ http://counter.li.org
In openSUSE 11.2 x86_64 the "Kickoff Application Launcher" puts the
picasa eexecutable in wine (one line):
env WINEPREFIX="/home/pat/.wine" wine "C:\Program Files\Google\Picasa3\Picasa3.exe"
I add an alias (one line)
alias picasa3='wine "/home/pat/.wine/dosdevices/c:/Program Files/Google/Picasa3/Picasa3.exe"'
Yes, google *could* help, but....
And, concise instructions for installing picasa 3.6 from wine in linux
have been posted here recently five or six times. It is really simple
for later linux versions,
wine picasa36-setup.exe
adding an alias or menu instance may pose new users more problem :^)
> * mhenriday<mhen...@gmail.com> [01-01-70 11:34]:
>> Patrick, releasing an updated Picasa package for Linux would have one
>> great advantage for new Linux users - simplicity and ease of
>> installation. Unfortunately, I suspect you are correct in that Google
>> decided that this user segment was not of sufficient interest that the
>> resources (we had, for example, really great Google guides on this
>> forum) involved in maintaining the updates was justified. But it
>> wouldn't be a bad idea if, as a sort of compensation for abandoning
>> the project, Google could link to a how-to for Linux users which
>> explained how to install Picasa for Windows under Wine....
>
> Yes, google *could* help, but....
>
> And, concise instructions for installing picasa 3.6 from wine in linux
> have been posted here recently five or six times. It is really simple
> for later linux versions,
> wine picasa36-setup.exe
Is updating wine from whatever was included in the last linux version
essential?
> adding an alias or menu instance may pose new users more problem :^)
Aliases are what memory macros (I think that's what they were called,
anyway) were in DOS -- a tool for the lazy. I <heart> lazy!
BTW, if anybody cares, I can't see a single google video with the latest
firefox/linux. "Can't initialize plugin", but no mention of what plugin
it might want.
--
Cheers, Bev
======================================================================
You need only three tools: WD-40, duct tape and a hammer. If it doesn't
move and it should, use WD-40. If it moves and shouldn't, use duct tape.
If you can't fix it with a hammer you've got an electrical problem.
ONLY if you want to keep your previous data. Personally, I would save
the old versions data files and then try to put them back into the new
version.
> >adding an alias or menu instance may pose new users more problem :^)
>
> Aliases are what memory macros (I think that's what they were called,
> anyway) were in DOS -- a tool for the lazy. I <heart> lazy!
I believe that would come closer to "memory batch files". I would define
a linux alias as a named link to an operation with included parameters.
> BTW, if anybody cares, I can't see a single google video with the
> latest firefox/linux. "Can't initialize plugin", but no mention of
> what plugin it might want.
I have no problem with MozillaFirefox 3.6.7, just tried it. Wasn't asked
for a *plugin*. openSUSE 11.2 x86_64
> On Jul 20, 9:25 pm, The Real Bev<bashley...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [snip]
>> Is updating wine from whatever was included in the last
>> linux version essential?
>
> Not essential, but why not reap the benefits that
> the newer WINE has to offer. Of course, it also
> depends what version you're running. Check out the
> WINE changelog to see what changes have been applied.
I don't really care, I just want to know that recent versions of
Picasa/Win will work under the last version of wine provided with the
linux version. What I don't want to do is get into a mess of
configuration/additional libraries/modification/recompilation crap for
what seems to be marginal benefit.
In case you wonder why I'm so negative, I just tried to install Chrome
for linux. It wouldn't. It wanted something that wanted something else
that I simply couldn't find. I'm lazy now, and my tolerance for
frustration is a lot lower now than it was 20 years ago.
>> > adding an alias or menu instance may pose new users more problem :^)
>>
>> Aliases are what memory macros (I think that's what they were called,
>> anyway) were in DOS -- a tool for the lazy. I<heart> lazy!
>
> Not sure what a "memory macro" is :) FWIW, in the old
> DOS days, we referred to them as "DOS batch files".
> (If that's what you're referring to).
I found this capability late in my DOS life. You could write a mess of
small batch filettes (can't remember what the limit was) in a single
file, much like the alias file. The whole thing was kept in memory.
Probably faster, but mainly I just hated the idea of wasting all that
disk space on dumb little one-line batch files, especially since I was
getting a rep as a space hog with the sysadmin.
> In the Unix/Linux world, a DOS batch file would be akin
> to, for example, a BASH script file. Simply, both are
> text files that contain one or more [shell or external]
> commands (and offers programming constructs), thus
> automating a repetitive sequence of commands and/or logic.
>
> An "alias" is a bit different, although it could be argued
> that an alias is akin to a script. An alias is a shortcut
> or synonym or abbreviation (take your pick:) which allows
> a "name" to be associated to some command string. An alias
> is specific to the shell (such as BASH). An alias can also
> contain logic statements.
>
> Aliases can be created (and deleted) at the command-line
> or defined within the login script (so it's always avail)
> and within BASH scripts. Open a command-line and execute
> "alias" and a list of current aliases is displayed.
>
> Example ... tired of having to type ...
> ~> ls -alhi --file-type --group-directories-first
> ... all the time? Create an alias for it:
> ~> alias myls='ls -alhi --file-type --group-directories-first'
> Now, simply type "myls" and it'll expand to the "long" version :)
I've used 'dird' for a decade now -- 'ls -altGF --color=yes |more' --
and couldn't get along without it.
>
>> BTW, if anybody cares, I can't see a single google video with the latest
>> firefox/linux. "Can't initialize plugin", but no mention of what plugin
>> it might want.
>
> No problems here. I have FF 3.6.7 and the FF 4-beta and
> Google videos work fine (and YouTube). Ensure the Flash
> player plugin is recognized by FF.
I installed the latest flash and it works with other sites. Just one
more nastiness. Boy, Adobe doesn't make it easy, do they?
--
Cheers, Bev
---------------------------------
aibohphobia - fear of palindromes
to get picasa 3.6 running on linux, all that is required is:
wine picasa36-setup.exe
anything else is dressing :^)
what distro/ver are you running that you had that much trouble installing
the chrome browser?
openSUSE 11.2 x86_64
rpm -Uvh chromium-6.0.443.0-5.1.x86_64.rpm
installed and running
> * The Real Bev<bashl...@gmail.com> [07-22-10 23:27]:
>>
>> I don't really care, I just want to know that recent versions of
>> Picasa/Win will work under the last version of wine provided with the
>> linux version. What I don't want to do is get into a mess of
>> configuration/additional libraries/modification/recompilation crap
>> for what seems to be marginal benefit.
>>
> to get picasa 3.6 running on linux, all that is required is:
> wine picasa36-setup.exe
>
> anything else is dressing :^)
OK, I'll give it a shot when I get the energy, but if it goes all
pear-shaped I'm going to blame YOU.
> what distro/ver are you running that you had that much trouble installing
> the chrome browser?
Slackware with fvwm95. I like the way it works WHEN IT'S FINALLY
WORKING, but nothing is EVER easy. My live-in consultant uses
Slackware, but hates X and refuses to use it unless it's absolutely
essential. I distrust RPMs because the damn things can never find the
right libraries even though they're there where slackware likes them, so
I have to make links if nodeps doesn't work.
Moreover, the motherboard (I assume) is flakey and won't recognize SATA
drives, insists that additional drives be hdg and hdh, and the USB
connections are iffy. </whine>
> openSUSE 11.2 x86_64
> rpm -Uvh chromium-6.0.443.0-5.1.x86_64.rpm
>
> installed and running
Is there any real advantage over firefox?
--
Cheers, Bev
====================================
Start worrying -- details to follow.
I believe chromium is a little less resource hungry, but it that is
paramount there is always dillo, midori, rekonq, arora, lynx and w3m.
> * The Real Bev<bashl...@gmail.com> [07-23-10 01:01]:
>>
>> Is there any real advantage over firefox?
>
> I believe chromium is a little less resource hungry, but it that is
> paramount there is always dillo, midori, rekonq, arora, lynx and w3m.
OK, no real advantage then. Much disadvantage. I spent nearly an hour
trying to make the UI fonts (menu, etc.) bigger or bold or SOMETHING
more readable than the tiny dot-matrix-like font currently used which
requires us to be two to three feet away from the 52" TV in order to
read it. Real bitch. Not Ready For Prime Time.
None of which has anything to do with Picasa, which I like. If it ain't
broke, don't fix it.
--
Cheers, Bev
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Please hassle me, I thrive on stress.
> On Jul 22, 11:58 pm, The Real Bev<bashley...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Slackware with fvwm95. I like the way it works WHEN IT'S FINALLY
>> WORKING, but nothing is EVER easy.
>
> I'd suggest you use a higher-level GNU/Linux distro. Slackware
> requires much more attention to detail.
Yes, but Rule 1 about choosing distributions is to ALWAYS pick the same
one your consultant/helper/husband uses :-)
>> Is there any real advantage over firefox?
>
> Chrome has a number of advantages. It has a smaller footprint, has a
> faster rendering engine and faster Javascript engine. There's less
> GUI eye-candy.
>
> One great feature is that each tab runs as its own process, so if one
> tab page hangs or crashes, that one tab page dies, and not the whole
> browser. Imagine if you have 6 or 7 tab-pages open and one of them
> crashes on Firefox - the whole browser will crash - with Chrome, only
> that one tab crashes.
>
> Sorry for going off-topic. alt.os.linux or
> comp.os.linux.setup/comp.os.linux.misc USENET groups would be more
> appropriate for general GNU/Linux questions/discussions outside of
> running Picasa on GNU/Linux :)
Thread drift. Mea culpa.