Re: Intermix fvwm and gnome [Was: Scons moves to its new home: development/scons]
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 01:37:08PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: I think that once MS was accused to have an agreement with hardware manufacturers in order to force people buying new hardware. I don't think this is the case with gnome but they (and not only them) seem to be interested in following MS policies (they have the largest user base, so they *must* be correct, seems to be their thought). Do you know any numbers of KDE vs GNOME vs other WM user numbers? Andre'
Re: Intermix fvwm and gnome [Was: Scons moves to its new home: development/scons]
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 06:28:36PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote: On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 01:37:08PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: I think that once MS was accused to have an agreement with hardware manufacturers in order to force people buying new hardware. I don't think this is the case with gnome but they (and not only them) seem to be interested in following MS policies (they have the largest user base, so they *must* be correct, seems to be their thought). Do you know any numbers of KDE vs GNOME vs other WM user numbers? Sorry, I don't have any. -- Enrico
Re: Intermix fvwm and gnome [Was: Scons moves to its new home: development/scons]
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 01:37:08PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > I think that once MS was accused to have an agreement with hardware > manufacturers in order to force people buying new hardware. I don't > think this is the case with gnome but they (and not only them) seem > to be interested in following MS policies (they have the largest > user base, so they *must* be correct, seems to be their thought). Do you know any numbers of KDE vs GNOME vs other WM user numbers? Andre'
Re: Intermix fvwm and gnome [Was: Scons moves to its new home: development/scons]
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 06:28:36PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote: > On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 01:37:08PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > I think that once MS was accused to have an agreement with hardware > > manufacturers in order to force people buying new hardware. I don't > > think this is the case with gnome but they (and not only them) seem > > to be interested in following MS policies (they have the largest > > user base, so they *must* be correct, seems to be their thought). > > Do you know any numbers of KDE vs GNOME vs other WM user numbers? Sorry, I don't have any. -- Enrico
Intermix fvwm and gnome [Was: Scons moves to its new home: development/scons]
Enrico Forestieri wrote: On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 08:36:15PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote: On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 12:34:43AM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: and selecting your url and hitting Ctrl-Mouse should work. If only I could use fvwm with gnome! *shrug* I can use fvwm happily intermixed with native windows on my WinXP box at work so I would be surprised if the same could not be set up with a more X-ish environment like Gnome. I think that a window manager should be explicitely designed to work with gnome. I'm using Window Maker 0.80.1 at work for my desktop, a really old one. I have no problems to use the latest gnome applications from a remote server. The time for ssh -X -f server /opt/gnome/bin/gnome-terminal to open the terminal is below 2 seconds. But I think it's the performance of the system where gnome-terminal is running what matters. Stephan --
Re: Intermix fvwm and gnome [Was: Scons moves to its new home: development/scons]
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 09:43:23AM +0200, Stephan Witt wrote: Enrico Forestieri wrote: On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 08:36:15PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote: On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 12:34:43AM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: and selecting your url and hitting Ctrl-Mouse should work. If only I could use fvwm with gnome! *shrug* I can use fvwm happily intermixed with native windows on my WinXP box at work so I would be surprised if the same could not be set up with a more X-ish environment like Gnome. I think that a window manager should be explicitely designed to work with gnome. I'm using Window Maker 0.80.1 at work for my desktop, a really old one. I have no problems to use the latest gnome applications from a remote server. The time for ssh -X -f server /opt/gnome/bin/gnome-terminal to open the terminal is below 2 seconds. But I think it's the performance of the system where gnome-terminal is running what matters. Yes, I know that. I could also simply use fvwm and nevertheless launch gnome applications, but I would lose all other gnome goodies. If you want the WM integrated into gnome, it must be designed for this task. I have tried icewm, metacity and sawfish (sawmill?), and by far prefer the latter. My point is that at every new release the heaviness increases and it seems that you are supposed to be running the latest and greatest hardware for using it. I think that once MS was accused to have an agreement with hardware manufacturers in order to force people buying new hardware. I don't think this is the case with gnome but they (and not only them) seem to be interested in following MS policies (they have the largest user base, so they *must* be correct, seems to be their thought). Please, let's stop here this highly OT thread ;-) -- Enrico
Intermix fvwm and gnome [Was: Scons moves to its new home: development/scons]
Enrico Forestieri wrote: On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 08:36:15PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote: On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 12:34:43AM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: and selecting your url and hitting Ctrl-Mouse should work. If only I could use fvwm with gnome! *shrug* I can use fvwm happily intermixed with native windows on my WinXP box at work so I would be surprised if the same could not be set up with a more X-ish environment like Gnome. I think that a window manager should be explicitely designed to work with gnome. I'm using Window Maker 0.80.1 at work for my desktop, a really old one. I have no problems to use the latest gnome applications from a remote server. The time for "ssh -X -f server /opt/gnome/bin/gnome-terminal" to open the terminal is below 2 seconds. But I think it's the performance of the system where gnome-terminal is running what matters. Stephan --
Re: Intermix fvwm and gnome [Was: Scons moves to its new home: development/scons]
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 09:43:23AM +0200, Stephan Witt wrote: > Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 08:36:15PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote: > > > >>On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 12:34:43AM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > >> > and selecting your url and hitting Ctrl-Mouse should work. > >>> > >>>If only I could use fvwm with gnome! > >> > >>*shrug* > >> > >>I can use fvwm happily intermixed with native windows on my WinXP > >>box at work so I would be surprised if the same could not be set up > >>with a more X-ish environment like Gnome. > > > > > > I think that a window manager should be explicitely designed to > > work with gnome. > > I'm using Window Maker 0.80.1 at work for my desktop, a really old one. > I have no problems to use the latest gnome applications from a remote > server. The time for "ssh -X -f server /opt/gnome/bin/gnome-terminal" > to open the terminal is below 2 seconds. But I think it's the performance > of the system where gnome-terminal is running what matters. Yes, I know that. I could also simply use fvwm and nevertheless launch gnome applications, but I would lose all other gnome goodies. If you want the WM integrated into gnome, it must be designed for this task. I have tried icewm, metacity and sawfish (sawmill?), and by far prefer the latter. My point is that at every new release the heaviness increases and it seems that you are supposed to be running the latest and greatest hardware for using it. I think that once MS was accused to have an agreement with hardware manufacturers in order to force people buying new hardware. I don't think this is the case with gnome but they (and not only them) seem to be interested in following MS policies (they have the largest user base, so they *must* be correct, seems to be their thought). Please, let's stop here this highly OT thread ;-) -- Enrico
