Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
On Thursday 26 May 2011 05:50:14 Walter Dnes wrote: On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 07:13:41PM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote On Wednesday 25 May 2011 08:46:48 Indi wrote: and have you ever heard of 'code reuse' or 'modularity'? It seems - no. Because KDE itself might be huge. But once loaded the apps are pretty small - because they reuse code. kmail does not have its own html engine. It does not matter where you type your text etc pp. Sorta like Internet Explorer in Windows. It loads a lot faster and lighter than Firefox or Opera. That's because ie.exe is merely a front end to a bunch of libraries that are loaded at boot time, which contributes to the boot process taking do long. Starting ie.exe takes hardly any time, because 90% of the app is already loaded. Overall KDE uses LESS ram then most 'lightweight' solutions. Because xtermabiwordsome odd pagerthunderbird don't look so good anymore. This gem is a couple of years old, but still a worthy read: http://ktown.kde.org/~seli/memory/desktop_benchmark.html Read it. Seriously. I don't know how good exmap is, but my personal experience is quite different. Between Fall 1999 and Summer 2007 I had a Dell Dimension with a 450 mhz PIII and 128 megs of *SYSTEM RAM* (no not the video card). It was actually quite usable to the very end, with Blackbox WM, and running a few apps. Meanwhile, KDE (and GNOME for that matter) would take forever to load and make the system crawl after that, even with 1 or 2 apps loaded. I remember running Slackware on a Pentium 1 100MHz laptop with 128M RAM. The speed was of course glacial unless I was running only a console with no X. KDE would load and run, as long as I didn't push it too much. Fluxbox was more respectable. In contrast, MSWindows NT4 would load and run better as it was a more light- footed OS. MSWindows 3.1 was blisteringly fast and MSDOS, well ... However, life moves on and with the cost of hardware coming down software has moved towards larger, all bells and whistles, DEs. The change in design philosophy from KDE3 to KDE4 made things worse for those of us who do not want everything and the kitchen sink thrown in, but still want to use some KDE apps. Thankfully, the move to the KDE meta ebuilds has provided some compensation against a full blown monolithic KDE. Personally, I'm grateful that Linux devs continue to develop exceptional software and so I don't have to use MSWindows. On the other hand I have always preferred more lightweight WMs to the full enchilada of KDE and Gnome and wish that KDE devs retained the KDE3 design philosophy, or afforded us a light(er) option. PS. I'm not sure that Linus is using Gnome. I recall him bitching that the Gnome design approach (which unfortunately KDE imitated) was not the right direction to evolve linux in. -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
2011/5/26 Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com: PS. I'm not sure that Linus is using Gnome. I recall him bitching that the Gnome design approach (which unfortunately KDE imitated) was not the right direction to evolve linux in. Offtopic, but... He ditched gnome, then, a couple of years ago, he ditched kde4. He will for sure ditch gnome3 in about a couple of months. http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/012209-open-source-identity-linux-founder.html?page=1 He also said some time ago that, for years to come, there wouldn't be a 2.8 or 3.x for the linux kernel, but yesterday he said the opposite. That's not good or bad, it's just Linus speaking ;) -- Jesús Guerrero Botella
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 07:00:02AM +0200, Walter Dnes wrote: I don't know how good exmap is, but my personal experience is quite different. Between Fall 1999 and Summer 2007 I had a Dell Dimension with a 450 mhz PIII and 128 megs of *SYSTEM RAM* (no not the video card). It was actually quite usable to the very end, with Blackbox WM, and running a few apps. Meanwhile, KDE (and GNOME for that matter) would take forever to load and make the system crawl after that, even with 1 or 2 apps loaded. It's always like that with hardware though. My first computer was a 1987 Mac SE, eight (8) MHz CPU, maxed out to 4 MB RAM. Two 800MB floppies plus an external 250MB HDD (huge for the time). Ran Mac System 6.0.8, I used it for multitrack audio recording and desktop publishing (sounds quaint now, huh?) into the '90s. Of course, it had absolutely no security and only a poor illusion of multitasking... :) For the time it was great, but what we have now is much more flexible, capable, and secure. The business of ever-increasng consumption of computing resources is probably unavoidable, barring some major advance in coding. -- caveat utilitor ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 07:40:54AM -0400, Indi wrote: Two 800MB floppies 800 KB, sorry. Can't even think that small anymore... ;) -- caveat utilitor ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
On Thursday 26 May 2011 07:45:09 Indi wrote: On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 07:40:54AM -0400, Indi wrote: Two 800MB floppies 800 KB, sorry. Can't even think that small anymore... ;) Too bad, was just about to ask you where you found those back then :) -- Joost
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 11:31:40PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote No, I think you need to get real. It's 2011, what did you expect? Here's what I don't expect. I run a tight ship on my machine. I currently have gnumeric and AbiWord and libreoffice-bin running uncer icewm. In order to get emerge -p app-office/kword to actually start, I had to... !) remove sys-apps/dbus from /etc/portage/package.mask 2) add the following to /etc/portage/package.use x11-libs/qt-sql qt3support x11-libs/qt-core qt3support ssl exceptions x11-libs/qt-gui qt3support accessibility dbus x11-libs/qt-qt3support accessibility kde x11-libs/qt-svg accessibility x11-libs/qt-opengl qt3support x11-libs/qt-webkit kde sys-block/parted device-mapper sys-fs/udev extras sys-auth/consolekit policykit x11-libs/qt-declarative qt3support 3) and here is the 390 megabytes of stuff to emerge... gebuild N] dev-libs/libgpg-error-1.10 USE=-common-lisp -nls -static-libs [ebuild N] dev-libs/libical-0.43 [ebuild N] dev-util/boost-build-1.42.0 USE=-examples -python [ebuild N] sys-apps/sdparm-1.03 [ebuild N] sys-power/pm-quirks-20100619 [ebuild N] sys-block/eject-2.1.5-r2 USE=-nls [ebuild N] kde-base/oxygen-icons-4.6.2 USE=(-aqua) (-kdeenablefinal) (-kdeprefix) [ebuild N] sys-apps/dbus-1.4.6 USE=X -debug -doc (-selinux) -static-libs -test [ebuild N] dev-cpp/eigen-2.0.13 USE=-debug -doc -examples [ebuild N] dev-libs/libassuan-2.0.1 USE=-static-libs [ebuild N] dev-libs/cyrus-sasl-2.1.23-r1 USE=-authdaemond -berkdb -crypt -gdbm -java -kerberos -ldap -mysql -ntlm_unsupported_patch -pam -postgres -sample -sqlite -srp -ssl -urandom [ebuild N] dev-libs/libksba-1.2.0 USE=-static-libs [ebuild N] dev-libs/libgcrypt-1.4.6 USE=-static-libs [ebuild N] dev-libs/pth-2.0.7-r2 USE=-debug [ebuild N] app-admin/eselect-boost-0.3 [ebuild NS ] app-text/docbook-xml-dtd-4.2-r2 [4.3-r1] [ebuild N] dev-libs/libpcre-8.12 USE=bzip2 (unicode) zlib -cxx -recursion-limit -static-libs [ebuild N] x11-libs/libXScrnSaver-1.2.1 USE=-static-libs [ebuild N] kde-base/kde-env-4.6.2 USE=(-aqua) (-kdeenablefinal) (-kdeprefix) [ebuild N] sys-apps/attr-2.4.44 USE=-nls [ebuild N] dev-cpp/clucene-0.9.21b-r1 USE=threads -debug -doc -static-libs [ebuild NS ] virtual/libusb-0 [1] [ebuild N] virtual/eject-0 [ebuild N] app-crypt/pinentry-0.8.0 USE=-caps -gtk -ncurses -qt4 -static [ebuild N] dev-libs/dbus-glib-0.92 USE=-bash-completion -debug -doc -static-libs -test [ebuild N] app-crypt/gnupg-2.0.17 USE=bzip2 -adns -caps -doc -ldap -nls -openct -pcsc-lite (-selinux) -smartcard -static [ebuild N] dev-libs/boost-1.42.0-r2 USE=-debug -doc -eselect -icu -mpi -python -static-libs -test -tools [ebuild N] app-misc/strigi-0.7.1 USE=exif -clucene -dbus -debug -fam -hyperestraier -inotify (-log) -qt4 -test [ebuild N] sys-apps/acl-2.2.49 USE=(-nfs) -nls [ebuild N] sys-power/pm-utils-1.4.1 USE=-alsa -debug -networkmanager -ntp VIDEO_CARDS=intel -radeon [ebuild R ] sys-fs/udev-151-r4 USE=extras* [ebuild N] app-crypt/gpgme-1.3.0 USE=-common-lisp -pth [ebuild N] sys-fs/lvm2-2.02.73-r1 USE=(-clvm) (-cman) -lvm1 -readline (-selinux) -static [ebuild N] dev-libs/libatasmart-0.17 USE=-static-libs [ebuild N] sys-block/parted-2.3 USE=device-mapper -debug -nls -readline (-selinux) [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-core-4.7.2-r1 USE=exceptions qt3support ssl (-aqua) -debug -glib -iconv -jit -optimized-qmake -pch -private-headers [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-sql-4.7.2 USE=qt3support (-aqua) -debug -exceptions (-firebird) -freetds -iconv -mysql -odbc -pch -postgres -sqlite [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-script-4.7.2 USE=(-aqua) -debug -exceptions -iconv -jit -pch -private-headers [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-test-4.7.2 USE=(-aqua) -debug -exceptions -iconv -pch [ebuild N] dev-util/automoc-0.9.88 [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-dbus-4.7.2 USE=(-aqua) -debug -exceptions -pch [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-xmlpatterns-4.7.2 USE=(-aqua) -debug -pch [ebuild N] dev-libs/soprano-2.6.0 USE=-clucene -dbus -debug -doc -raptor -redland -test -virtuoso [ebuild N] app-crypt/qca-2.0.3 USE=(-aqua) -debug -doc -examples [ebuild N] dev-libs/libattica-0.2.0 USE=-debug [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-gui-4.7.2 USE=accessibility dbus mng qt3support tiff (-aqua) -cups -debug -egl -exceptions -glib -gtkstyle -nas -nis -pch -private-headers -raster -trace -xinerama [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-qt3support-4.7.2 USE=accessibility kde (-aqua) -debug -exceptions -pch -phonon [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-svg-4.7.2 USE=accessibility (-aqua) -debug -exceptions -iconv -pch [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-opengl-4.7.2 USE=qt3support (-aqua) -debug -egl -exceptions -pch [ebuild N] media-libs/phonon-4.5.0 USE=(-aqua) -debug -gstreamer -pulseaudio -vlc -xine [ebuild N]
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 10:00:03AM +0200, Walter Dnes wrote: On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 11:31:40PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote No, I think you need to get real. It's 2011, what did you expect? Here's what I don't expect. I run a tight ship on my machine. I currently have gnumeric and AbiWord and libreoffice-bin running uncer icewm. In order to get emerge -p app-office/kword to actually start, I had to... !) remove sys-apps/dbus from /etc/portage/package.mask 2) add the following to /etc/portage/package.use x11-libs/qt-sql qt3support x11-libs/qt-core qt3support ssl exceptions x11-libs/qt-gui qt3support accessibility dbus x11-libs/qt-qt3support accessibility kde x11-libs/qt-svg accessibility x11-libs/qt-opengl qt3support x11-libs/qt-webkit kde sys-block/parted device-mapper sys-fs/udev extras sys-auth/consolekit policykit x11-libs/qt-declarative qt3support 3) and here is the 390 megabytes of stuff to emerge... gebuild N] dev-libs/libgpg-error-1.10 USE=-common-lisp -nls -static-libs [ebuild N] dev-libs/libical-0.43 [ebuild N] dev-util/boost-build-1.42.0 USE=-examples -python [ebuild N] sys-apps/sdparm-1.03 [ebuild N] sys-power/pm-quirks-20100619 [ebuild N] sys-block/eject-2.1.5-r2 USE=-nls [ebuild N] kde-base/oxygen-icons-4.6.2 USE=(-aqua) (-kdeenablefinal) (-kdeprefix) [ebuild N] sys-apps/dbus-1.4.6 USE=X -debug -doc (-selinux) -static-libs -test [ebuild N] dev-cpp/eigen-2.0.13 USE=-debug -doc -examples [ebuild N] dev-libs/libassuan-2.0.1 USE=-static-libs [ebuild N] dev-libs/cyrus-sasl-2.1.23-r1 USE=-authdaemond -berkdb -crypt -gdbm -java -kerberos -ldap -mysql -ntlm_unsupported_patch -pam -postgres -sample -sqlite -srp -ssl -urandom [ebuild N] dev-libs/libksba-1.2.0 USE=-static-libs [ebuild N] dev-libs/libgcrypt-1.4.6 USE=-static-libs [ebuild N] dev-libs/pth-2.0.7-r2 USE=-debug [ebuild N] app-admin/eselect-boost-0.3 [ebuild NS ] app-text/docbook-xml-dtd-4.2-r2 [4.3-r1] [ebuild N] dev-libs/libpcre-8.12 USE=bzip2 (unicode) zlib -cxx -recursion-limit -static-libs [ebuild N] x11-libs/libXScrnSaver-1.2.1 USE=-static-libs [ebuild N] kde-base/kde-env-4.6.2 USE=(-aqua) (-kdeenablefinal) (-kdeprefix) [ebuild N] sys-apps/attr-2.4.44 USE=-nls [ebuild N] dev-cpp/clucene-0.9.21b-r1 USE=threads -debug -doc -static-libs [ebuild NS ] virtual/libusb-0 [1] [ebuild N] virtual/eject-0 [ebuild N] app-crypt/pinentry-0.8.0 USE=-caps -gtk -ncurses -qt4 -static [ebuild N] dev-libs/dbus-glib-0.92 USE=-bash-completion -debug -doc -static-libs -test [ebuild N] app-crypt/gnupg-2.0.17 USE=bzip2 -adns -caps -doc -ldap -nls -openct -pcsc-lite (-selinux) -smartcard -static [ebuild N] dev-libs/boost-1.42.0-r2 USE=-debug -doc -eselect -icu -mpi -python -static-libs -test -tools [ebuild N] app-misc/strigi-0.7.1 USE=exif -clucene -dbus -debug -fam -hyperestraier -inotify (-log) -qt4 -test [ebuild N] sys-apps/acl-2.2.49 USE=(-nfs) -nls [ebuild N] sys-power/pm-utils-1.4.1 USE=-alsa -debug -networkmanager -ntp VIDEO_CARDS=intel -radeon [ebuild R ] sys-fs/udev-151-r4 USE=extras* [ebuild N] app-crypt/gpgme-1.3.0 USE=-common-lisp -pth [ebuild N] sys-fs/lvm2-2.02.73-r1 USE=(-clvm) (-cman) -lvm1 -readline (-selinux) -static [ebuild N] dev-libs/libatasmart-0.17 USE=-static-libs [ebuild N] sys-block/parted-2.3 USE=device-mapper -debug -nls -readline (-selinux) [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-core-4.7.2-r1 USE=exceptions qt3support ssl (-aqua) -debug -glib -iconv -jit -optimized-qmake -pch -private-headers [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-sql-4.7.2 USE=qt3support (-aqua) -debug -exceptions (-firebird) -freetds -iconv -mysql -odbc -pch -postgres -sqlite [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-script-4.7.2 USE=(-aqua) -debug -exceptions -iconv -jit -pch -private-headers [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-test-4.7.2 USE=(-aqua) -debug -exceptions -iconv -pch [ebuild N] dev-util/automoc-0.9.88 [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-dbus-4.7.2 USE=(-aqua) -debug -exceptions -pch [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-xmlpatterns-4.7.2 USE=(-aqua) -debug -pch [ebuild N] dev-libs/soprano-2.6.0 USE=-clucene -dbus -debug -doc -raptor -redland -test -virtuoso [ebuild N] app-crypt/qca-2.0.3 USE=(-aqua) -debug -doc -examples [ebuild N] dev-libs/libattica-0.2.0 USE=-debug [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-gui-4.7.2 USE=accessibility dbus mng qt3support tiff (-aqua) -cups -debug -egl -exceptions -glib -gtkstyle -nas -nis -pch -private-headers -raster -trace -xinerama [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-qt3support-4.7.2 USE=accessibility kde (-aqua) -debug -exceptions -pch -phonon [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-svg-4.7.2 USE=accessibility (-aqua) -debug -exceptions -iconv -pch [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-opengl-4.7.2
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 7:46 AM, Indi thebeelzebubtrig...@gmail.com wrote: For people already running kde it's ok, but for the rest of us it's a bit ridiculous, isn't it? If he was already using Qt4, it might not have seemed so bad. ;) I think much of that list are from Qt4 and its dependencies. Other than kdelibs, kde-env, kdepimlibs, oxygen-icons I don't see much generic KDE stuff (not counting koffice since that's what he was installing).
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 04:30:02PM +0200, Paul Hartman wrote: On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 7:46 AM, Indi thebeelzebubtrig...@gmail.com wrote: For people already running kde it's ok, but for the rest of us it's a bit ridiculous, isn't it? If he was already using Qt4, it might not have seemed so bad. ;) I think much of that list are from Qt4 and its dependencies. Other than kdelibs, kde-env, kdepimlibs, oxygen-icons I don't see much generic KDE stuff (not counting koffice since that's what he was installing). Last I tried it, you can't run much of that stuff without the whole kdeinit thing, which is a giant resource hog (relatively speaking, for those of us accustomed to running trim, fast, light systems). That why I said it's become like an OS unto itself. I remember when people used to carry on about bloaty GNUstep libs, and I said but those *are* small, fast, and light and people responded to me in the manner I've responded to kde people who say that about kde. So it really is all quite relative... :) My standard is simple: it has to be able to work without a mouse, and when I hit the keys, I want to see results *immediately* -- real results, not a wait dialog or spinny thing. -- caveat utilitor ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
Apparently, though unproven, at 14:46 on Wednesday 25 May 2011, Indi did opine thusly: For people already running kde it's ok, but for the rest of us it's a bit ridiculous, isn't it? I used to use a few k apps in the 3 days, they were small and easily integrated into the system. Now kde is like it's own OS, so they've basically eliminated their apps from consideration of non-kde users. Not that it matters much to me, one of the strengths of gentoo is how many ways there are to do a given task. But there are quite a few kde zealots who seem to be completely unaware of what we mean by fast, light, standalone. I guess some people didn't experience the 80s or 90s. :) It doesn't make sense running koffice without also running KDE, it's a hard requirement. And not only did I experience the 80s and 90s, but the 70s as well. So now that you have defined what fast, light, standalone means by your current needs, it is obvious that no such package exists and hence there is a gap in the market. Now we know what your next project will be. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 06:40:01PM +0200, Hartmut Figge wrote: Indi: Last I tried it, you can't run much of that stuff without the whole kdeinit thing, which is a giant resource hog (relatively speaking, for those of us accustomed to running trim, fast, light systems). If i will try knode, i get this result: Total: 69 packages (65 new, 2 in new slots, 2 reinstalls), Size of downloads: 361,274 kB I like mutt with the nntp patch for usenet anyway. Add rss2email and you have email, rss, and nntp all in mutt. Really nice. Quick and responsive, too. Using leafnode you can even have filters for nntp. Use elinks to open linked web content and feh for images, and you're all set. Well, until you want to watch something on hulu. But conkeror works well for that... :) -- caveat utilitor ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
On Wednesday 25 May 2011 08:46:48 Indi wrote: On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 10:00:03AM +0200, Walter Dnes wrote: On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 11:31:40PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote No, I think you need to get real. It's 2011, what did you expect? Here's what I don't expect. I run a tight ship on my machine. I currently have gnumeric and AbiWord and libreoffice-bin running uncer icewm. In order to get emerge -p app-office/kword to actually start, I had to... !) remove sys-apps/dbus from /etc/portage/package.mask 2) add the following to /etc/portage/package.use x11-libs/qt-sql qt3support x11-libs/qt-core qt3support ssl exceptions x11-libs/qt-gui qt3support accessibility dbus x11-libs/qt-qt3support accessibility kde x11-libs/qt-svg accessibility x11-libs/qt-opengl qt3support x11-libs/qt-webkit kde sys-block/parted device-mapper sys-fs/udev extras sys-auth/consolekit policykit x11-libs/qt-declarative qt3support 3) and here is the 390 megabytes of stuff to emerge... gebuild N] dev-libs/libgpg-error-1.10 USE=-common-lisp -nls -static-libs [ebuild N] dev-libs/libical-0.43 [ebuild N] dev-util/boost-build-1.42.0 USE=-examples -python [ebuild N] sys-apps/sdparm-1.03 [ebuild N] sys-power/pm-quirks-20100619 [ebuild N] sys-block/eject-2.1.5-r2 USE=-nls [ebuild N] kde-base/oxygen-icons-4.6.2 USE=(-aqua) (-kdeenablefinal) (-kdeprefix) [ebuild N] sys-apps/dbus-1.4.6 USE=X -debug -doc (-selinux) -static-libs -test [ebuild N] dev-cpp/eigen-2.0.13 USE=-debug -doc -examples [ebuild N] dev-libs/libassuan-2.0.1 USE=-static-libs [ebuild N] dev-libs/cyrus-sasl-2.1.23-r1 USE=-authdaemond -berkdb -crypt -gdbm -java -kerberos -ldap -mysql -ntlm_unsupported_patch -pam -postgres -sample -sqlite -srp -ssl -urandom [ebuild N] dev-libs/libksba-1.2.0 USE=-static-libs [ebuild N] dev-libs/libgcrypt-1.4.6 USE=-static-libs [ebuild N] dev-libs/pth-2.0.7-r2 USE=-debug [ebuild N] app-admin/eselect-boost-0.3 [ebuild NS ] app-text/docbook-xml-dtd-4.2-r2 [4.3-r1] [ebuild N] dev-libs/libpcre-8.12 USE=bzip2 (unicode) zlib -cxx -recursion-limit -static-libs [ebuild N] x11-libs/libXScrnSaver-1.2.1 USE=-static-libs [ebuild N] kde-base/kde-env-4.6.2 USE=(-aqua) (-kdeenablefinal) (-kdeprefix) [ebuild N] sys-apps/attr-2.4.44 USE=-nls [ebuild N] dev-cpp/clucene-0.9.21b-r1 USE=threads -debug -doc -static-libs [ebuild NS ] virtual/libusb-0 [1] [ebuild N] virtual/eject-0 [ebuild N] app-crypt/pinentry-0.8.0 USE=-caps -gtk -ncurses -qt4 -static [ebuild N] dev-libs/dbus-glib-0.92 USE=-bash-completion -debug -doc -static-libs -test [ebuild N] app-crypt/gnupg-2.0.17 USE=bzip2 -adns -caps -doc -ldap -nls -openct -pcsc-lite (-selinux) -smartcard -static [ebuild N] dev-libs/boost-1.42.0-r2 USE=-debug -doc -eselect -icu -mpi -python -static-libs -test -tools [ebuild N] app-misc/strigi-0.7.1 USE=exif -clucene -dbus -debug -fam -hyperestraier -inotify (-log) -qt4 -test [ebuild N] sys-apps/acl-2.2.49 USE=(-nfs) -nls [ebuild N] sys-power/pm-utils-1.4.1 USE=-alsa -debug -networkmanager -ntp VIDEO_CARDS=intel -radeon [ebuild R ] sys-fs/udev-151-r4 USE=extras* [ebuild N] app-crypt/gpgme-1.3.0 USE=-common-lisp -pth [ebuild N] sys-fs/lvm2-2.02.73-r1 USE=(-clvm) (-cman) -lvm1 -readline (-selinux) -static [ebuild N] dev-libs/libatasmart-0.17 USE=-static-libs [ebuild N] sys-block/parted-2.3 USE=device-mapper -debug -nls -readline (-selinux) [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-core-4.7.2-r1 USE=exceptions qt3support ssl (-aqua) -debug -glib -iconv -jit -optimized-qmake -pch -private-headers [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-sql-4.7.2 USE=qt3support (-aqua) -debug -exceptions (-firebird) -freetds -iconv -mysql -odbc -pch -postgres -sqlite [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-script-4.7.2 USE=(-aqua) -debug -exceptions -iconv -jit -pch -private-headers [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-test-4.7.2 USE=(-aqua) -debug -exceptions -iconv -pch [ebuild N] dev-util/automoc-0.9.88 [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-dbus-4.7.2 USE=(-aqua) -debug -exceptions -pch [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-xmlpatterns-4.7.2 USE=(-aqua) -debug -pch [ebuild N] dev-libs/soprano-2.6.0 USE=-clucene -dbus -debug -doc -raptor -redland -test -virtuoso [ebuild N] app-crypt/qca-2.0.3 USE=(-aqua) -debug -doc -examples [ebuild N ] dev-libs/libattica-0.2.0 USE=-debug [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-gui-4.7.2 USE=accessibility dbus mng qt3support tiff (-aqua) -cups -debug -egl -exceptions -glib -gtkstyle -nas -nis -pch -private-headers -raster -trace -xinerama [ebuild N ] x11-libs/qt-qt3support-4.7.2 USE=accessibility kde (-aqua) -debug -exceptions -pch -phonon [ebuild N] x11-libs/qt-svg-4.7.2 USE=accessibility (-aqua) -debug -exceptions
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 07:20:01PM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: and have you ever heard of 'code reuse' or 'modularity'? It seems - no. Because KDE itself might be huge. But once loaded the apps are pretty small - because they reuse code. kmail does not have its own html engine. It does not matter where you type your text etc pp. I'm sorry, but the once you load this GB of libs argument is missing the point entirely... Overall KDE uses LESS ram then most 'lightweight' solutions. No. Been around the block investigating this, it's BS. I've investigated this quite thoroughly because I have to support users who need everything to be easy and automatic and pointy-clicky (and preferably shiny too). Frankly, arguing that kde4 is a lighter weight solution is something only a hardcore zealot or someone who's not used a WM without a DE could do with a straight face. -- caveat utilitor ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 07:20:01PM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: Oh - and you should spend some time on Alan's postings. He is not only a certified OLD FART, he has some serious first hand, real world experience that makes most of the other OLD FARTs on this list look like noobs. Sorry, I meant to address this as well: Don't get caught in the approval/disapproval trap. My preferences and opinions have nothing to do with personal stuff. I read everyone's posts, regardless of whether or not I agree with them on anything, and have no enemies, because I'm not interested in that sort of thing. There are occasionally people who dislike me, and that's fine. I don't like everybody either. But generally speaking, what others think is none of my business until they try to convince me I should also think that way. Then it seems appropriate to address it. You know, Linus uses gnome last I heard. So I'm well aware that my personal preferences have nothing to do with whether or not I am proficient or knowledgeable. Maybe I'm pushing peoples' buttons by sounding like some inflexible, judgemental old fart you met before. If so, sorry! I'm more of a live and let live, yet strongly opinionated old fart. :) -- caveat utilitor ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 07:10:01PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: Apparently, though unproven, at 14:46 on Wednesday 25 May 2011, Indi did opine thusly: For people already running kde it's ok, but for the rest of us it's a bit ridiculous, isn't it? I used to use a few k apps in the 3 days, they were small and easily integrated into the system. Now kde is like it's own OS, so they've basically eliminated their apps from consideration of non-kde users. Not that it matters much to me, one of the strengths of gentoo is how many ways there are to do a given task. But there are quite a few kde zealots who seem to be completely unaware of what we mean by fast, light, standalone. I guess some people didn't experience the 80s or 90s. :) It doesn't make sense running koffice without also running KDE, it's a hard requirement. And not only did I experience the 80s and 90s, but the 70s as well. So now that you have defined what fast, light, standalone means by your current needs, it is obvious that no such package exists and hence there is a gap in the market. Now we know what your next project will be. Writing a virus that destroys all msoffice installs once and for all so we can finally just use sane formats editable as text? :D (kidding, of course, I would never do malware) Actually, writing an add-on for vim that can edit word documents is an idea I plan to look into when I get some time. Right now I use up all my poor little brain's ability to focus on other things, but maybe soon there'll be a break. -- caveat utilitor ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
Apparently, though unproven, at 19:13 on Wednesday 25 May 2011, Volker Armin Hemmann did opine thusly: Oh - and you should spend some time on Alan's postings. He is not only a certified OLD FART, he has some serious first hand, real world experience that makes most of the other OLD FARTs on this list look like noobs. Oh, I don't know about that so much. OK, I agree on the old fart bit. But many days Neil and Paul can make me look like a blithering idiot :-) Incidentally, this gentoo-user list has the highest concentration of seriously knowledgeable folk across a wide spectrum of any list/forum/whatever I've ever come across. Sometimes, it's frightening. I just wanted to put that out there - positive reinforcement. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
On Wed, 25 May 2011 22:11:24 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: But many days Neil and Paul can make me look like a blithering idiot :-) Only with your help :P -- Neil Bothwick Why do programmers get Halloween and Christmas confused? Because oct 31 is the same as dec 25. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
Volker Armin Hemmann writes: This gem is a couple of years old, but still a worthy read: http://ktown.kde.org/~seli/memory/desktop_benchmark.html Read it. Seriously. Interesting. I'd like to also see KDE4 values :) BTW, according to the author, the only real memory usage information utility is Exmap. It's in portage, but when I run it (both exmtool and gexmap, and the exmap kernel module is loaded), it outputs lots of stuff, then aborts with 'start pgnum out of range'. Is anyone actually using it? Wonko
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 07:13:41PM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote On Wednesday 25 May 2011 08:46:48 Indi wrote: and have you ever heard of 'code reuse' or 'modularity'? It seems - no. Because KDE itself might be huge. But once loaded the apps are pretty small - because they reuse code. kmail does not have its own html engine. It does not matter where you type your text etc pp. Sorta like Internet Explorer in Windows. It loads a lot faster and lighter than Firefox or Opera. That's because ie.exe is merely a front end to a bunch of libraries that are loaded at boot time, which contributes to the boot process taking do long. Starting ie.exe takes hardly any time, because 90% of the app is already loaded. Overall KDE uses LESS ram then most 'lightweight' solutions. Because xtermabiwordsome odd pagerthunderbird don't look so good anymore. This gem is a couple of years old, but still a worthy read: http://ktown.kde.org/~seli/memory/desktop_benchmark.html Read it. Seriously. I don't know how good exmap is, but my personal experience is quite different. Between Fall 1999 and Summer 2007 I had a Dell Dimension with a 450 mhz PIII and 128 megs of *SYSTEM RAM* (no not the video card). It was actually quite usable to the very end, with Blackbox WM, and running a few apps. Meanwhile, KDE (and GNOME for that matter) would take forever to load and make the system crawl after that, even with 1 or 2 apps loaded. -- Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 12:10:01AM +0200, walt wrote: On 05/20/2011 08:24 PM, Indi wrote: On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 12:50:01AM +0200, walt wrote: For you users of unstable gentoo: the recent update of 'icu' broke dozens of packages (as it always does) including libreoffice. The problem is that libreoffice fails to build if you have bison-2.5 I have bison-2.5, but am using libreoffice-bin which seems fine. Yes, that would be expected because bison is needed only at compile time, not at run time. I would be using libreoffice-bin too, except for a ridiculous change made about a year ago in the way openoffice charts are scaled on the y-axis. I complained bitterly on the openoffice 'chart' mail list, only to discover that openoffice changed its perfectly good scaling algorithm to ape a change made in M$ Office! Nobody at openoffice.org would consider reverting that ridiculous mee-too change, so I've been editing the open(libre)office source code to remove it myself before compiling it. I was very disappointed to find a major open- source project following M$ around like a hungry puppy :( It's unfortunate that we don't have small, fast, light, standalone programs to deal with the formats of word, excel, powerpoint, etc but if we did odds are most people would shun them for a big, bloaty office suite anyway. Personally, I'd love it if I could open and edit those office formats in vim... -- caveat utilitor ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
Apparently, though unproven, at 16:38 on Sunday 22 May 2011, Indi did opine thusly: On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 12:10:01AM +0200, walt wrote: On 05/20/2011 08:24 PM, Indi wrote: On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 12:50:01AM +0200, walt wrote: For you users of unstable gentoo: the recent update of 'icu' broke dozens of packages (as it always does) including libreoffice. The problem is that libreoffice fails to build if you have bison-2.5 I have bison-2.5, but am using libreoffice-bin which seems fine. Yes, that would be expected because bison is needed only at compile time, not at run time. I would be using libreoffice-bin too, except for a ridiculous change made about a year ago in the way openoffice charts are scaled on the y-axis. I complained bitterly on the openoffice 'chart' mail list, only to discover that openoffice changed its perfectly good scaling algorithm to ape a change made in M$ Office! Nobody at openoffice.org would consider reverting that ridiculous mee-too change, so I've been editing the open(libre)office source code to remove it myself before compiling it. I was very disappointed to find a major open- source project following M$ around like a hungry puppy :( It's unfortunate that we don't have small, fast, light, standalone programs to deal with the formats of word, excel, powerpoint, etc but if we did odds are most people would shun them for a big, bloaty office suite anyway. Personally, I'd love it if I could open and edit those office formats in vim... What makes you think they don't *already* exist? * app-office/libreoffice-bin-3.3.2 Total files : 8138 Total size : 498.24 MiB * app-office/koffice-libs-2.3.3 Total files : 697 Total size : 19.45 MiB * app-office/koffice-data-2.3.3 Total files : 214 Total size : 608.63 KiB * app-office/karbon-2.3.3 Total files : 160 Total size : 3 MiB * app-office/kexi-2.3.3 Total files : 337 Total size : 8.17 MiB * app-office/kpresenter-2.3.3 Total files : 188 Total size : 9.28 MiB * app-office/krita-2.3.3 Total files : 783 Total size : 26.10 MiB * app-office/kspread-2.3.3 Total files : 337 Total size : 11.62 MiB * app-office/kword-2.3.3-r1 Total files : 215 Total size : 7.82 MiB Small, fast, light, standalone: yeah, they are all there. Editing them in something vim-alike is highly unlikely to be useful - compare antiword. Office suites are gui programs and the gui layout is as important (if not more so) than the content. And I haven't even touched on graphics elements yet. So you may be able to modify the content but probably not the layout. Have a look inside OOo source code sometimes for a look at what it takes to calculate something as simple as where on the page some text goes. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 08:10:02PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: Apparently, though unproven, at 16:38 on Sunday 22 May 2011, Indi did opine thusly: It's unfortunate that we don't have small, fast, light, standalone programs to deal with the formats of word, excel, powerpoint, etc but if we did odds are most people would shun them for a big, bloaty office suite anyway. Personally, I'd love it if I could open and edit those office formats in vim... What makes you think they don't *already* exist? The fact that none of your examples fit the bill. Small, fast, light, standalone: yeah, they are all there. Your definition of small, fast, and light strikes me as most peculiar. Anything that requires a full-bloat DE (or enoough of its libs it might as well do so) is not standalone by any definition, and is unlikely to be small, fast, and light. I know all things are relative, but be real. -- caveat utilitor ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
Apparently, though unproven, at 20:26 on Sunday 22 May 2011, Indi did opine thusly: On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 08:10:02PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: Apparently, though unproven, at 16:38 on Sunday 22 May 2011, Indi did opine thusly: It's unfortunate that we don't have small, fast, light, standalone programs to deal with the formats of word, excel, powerpoint, etc but if we did odds are most people would shun them for a big, bloaty office suite anyway. Personally, I'd love it if I could open and edit those office formats in vim... What makes you think they don't *already* exist? The fact that none of your examples fit the bill. s/the/my/ there you go. Fixed that little oversight you made there. Small, fast, light, standalone: yeah, they are all there. Your definition of small, fast, and light strikes me as most peculiar. Anything that requires a full-bloat DE (or enoough of its libs it might as well do so) is not standalone by any definition, and is unlikely to be small, fast, and light. I know all things are relative, but be real. No, I think you need to get real. It's 2011, what did you expect? Any such project as a small light fast office suite has to include Gnome and/or KDE support to some degree. Without it, it's just dead in the water. And it's of sufficient complexity that scratch one's itch is unlikely to go anywhere - it's not a one person project. If we have to discuss this logically, you are going to have to define your terms. What are your requirements? -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 11:40:02PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: Apparently, though unproven, at 20:26 on Sunday 22 May 2011, Indi did opine thusly: On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 08:10:02PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: Apparently, though unproven, at 16:38 on Sunday 22 May 2011, Indi did opine thusly: It's unfortunate that we don't have small, fast, light, standalone programs to deal with the formats of word, excel, powerpoint, etc but if we did odds are most people would shun them for a big, bloaty office suite anyway. Personally, I'd love it if I could open and edit those office formats in vim... What makes you think they don't *already* exist? The fact that none of your examples fit the bill. s/the/my/ there you go. Fixed that little oversight you made there. Expressing my opinion is not an oversighjt, and I'm sorry you're so defensive that you can't even tolerate opinions which aren't yours so you have to correct them. Maybe you should just filter me out. -- Caveat utilitor, ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ Elaine Indulekha Sharpe
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
On Sun, 2011-05-22 at 19:41 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: Apparently, though unproven, at 16:38 on Sunday 22 May 2011, Indi did opine thusly: On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 12:10:01AM +0200, walt wrote: On 05/20/2011 08:24 PM, Indi wrote: On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 12:50:01AM +0200, walt wrote: For you users of unstable gentoo: the recent update of 'icu' broke dozens of packages (as it always does) including libreoffice. The problem is that libreoffice fails to build if you have bison-2.5 I have bison-2.5, but am using libreoffice-bin which seems fine. Yes, that would be expected because bison is needed only at compile time, not at run time. I would be using libreoffice-bin too, except for a ridiculous change made about a year ago in the way openoffice charts are scaled on the y-axis. I complained bitterly on the openoffice 'chart' mail list, only to discover that openoffice changed its perfectly good scaling algorithm to ape a change made in M$ Office! Nobody at openoffice.org would consider reverting that ridiculous mee-too change, so I've been editing the open(libre)office source code to remove it myself before compiling it. I was very disappointed to find a major open- source project following M$ around like a hungry puppy :( It's unfortunate that we don't have small, fast, light, standalone programs to deal with the formats of word, excel, powerpoint, etc but if we did odds are most people would shun them for a big, bloaty office suite anyway. Personally, I'd love it if I could open and edit those office formats in vim... What makes you think they don't *already* exist? * app-office/libreoffice-bin-3.3.2 Total files : 8138 Total size : 498.24 MiB * app-office/koffice-libs-2.3.3 Total files : 697 Total size : 19.45 MiB * app-office/koffice-data-2.3.3 Total files : 214 Total size : 608.63 KiB * app-office/karbon-2.3.3 Total files : 160 Total size : 3 MiB * app-office/kexi-2.3.3 Total files : 337 Total size : 8.17 MiB * app-office/kpresenter-2.3.3 Total files : 188 Total size : 9.28 MiB * app-office/krita-2.3.3 Total files : 783 Total size : 26.10 MiB * app-office/kspread-2.3.3 Total files : 337 Total size : 11.62 MiB * app-office/kword-2.3.3-r1 Total files : 215 Total size : 7.82 MiB Small, fast, light, standalone: yeah, they are all there. Editing them in something vim-alike is highly unlikely to be useful - compare antiword. Office suites are gui programs and the gui layout is as important (if not more so) than the content. And I haven't even touched on graphics elements yet. So you may be able to modify the content but probably not the layout. Have a look inside OOo source code sometimes for a look at what it takes to calculate something as simple as where on the page some text goes. Do any of them actually work acceptably in terms of compatibility with MSword though? - having a good, lite suit available for the quick jobs would be nice. The OO/LibreOffice suits are almost compatible, the others barely if at all. Even simple documents fox abiword for instance, and anything complex is hopeless. And unfortunately, working in an MS centric organisation means close to 100% compatibility is demanded by the other end, especially on documents being passed back and forward. BillK
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5
Apparently, though unproven, at 02:17 on Monday 23 May 2011, Bill Kenworthy did opine thusly: Do any of them actually work acceptably in terms of compatibility with MSword though? - having a good, lite suit available for the quick jobs would be nice. Well, my usual initial retort to MS suers on that is MS Office isn't even compatible with itself across versions! It doesn't help much but makes me feel better :-) koffice does a reasonable job overall as long as you restrict it to simple docs. In general, the more complex the source doc, the greater the chances of failure. This isn't anything to do with Office vs LibreOffice vs KOffice per se, it's just that office suites are complex beasts and 100% compatibility between them is unlikely to happen. It was like that in the days in WordPerfect and not much has changed. Some problems are just unsolveable. Consider how MS Word lays out pages and paragraphs on the page - it is fundamentally incompatible with the model OOo uses internally. Same with anchored images. The OO/LibreOffice suits are almost compatible, the others barely if at all. Even simple documents fox abiword for instance, and anything complex is hopeless. Your average user creates simple docs (regardless of length) without any style sheeting. Headings are big text bold, emphasis is bold or italics and by far the most common font change is to Comic Sans. Most folk avoid bullet/numbered lists like the plaque (mostly because they can't get it to work and have given up on having lists randomly re-number themselves). Spreadsheets for your average user are one big table with columns and rows. For these documents, KOffice manages fine. Corporate users are another story. Any corporate has a go-to team of PowerPoint experts, usually backed up with endless lists of stylesheets and templates. Good luck with compatibility with those, as you have observed. And unfortunately, working in an MS centric organisation means close to 100% compatibility is demanded by the other end, especially on documents being passed back and forward. Yup, the only thing that works in an MS shop is Office. It would be the same in reverse - an Office user would be just as stymied in an OOo/Libre-centric setting. Some battles can be fought and won. Sometimes it's easier to install VirtualBox. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
