One SLIGHT correction; Fedora (no 3) is below Mandriva (no 2). Mandriva is KDE by "default" (although like many other distros has both). And just below Fedora (no. 3) is SUSE, another KDE distro.
So, it could well be a toss up. BUT, and this is important, NO_ONE really knows. Very best regards; Bob Finch > On 9/2/05, Bozhidar Batsov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hello, >> >> With the upcoming release of the new GNOME 2.12, I want to say a >> couple of things... >> 1. Arch is said to do not have a default desktop environment - even >> so, I was left under the impression that a lot more work goes into >> building quality KDE packages than GNOME's, which is somewhat >> acceptable as I'm aware of the fact that most people use KDE anyway. >> But you could at least personalize GNOME with Arch splashsreens and >> default wallpaper the way you do it with KDE. You could include be bug >> reporting tool in GNOME's menu and so on. I noticed that even Xfce was >> more personalized than GNOME by default... Than spend some time >> verifying that all is working at least half as good as it should, for >> KDE runs perfectly in Arch in most ways, but GNOME has many issues... > > Hey! JGC does a kickass job of with his Gnome packages, and they are > just as high quality as KDE's. As for more people using kde than > gnome, it isnt a huge number more. If you go by distrowatch, which is a > great inaccurate measure, Gnome is miles ahead. Ubuntu and Fedora, which > are primarily gnome are at the top. > > Arch tries to leave it's packages as uncustomised as possible. I think > it's fine leaving it without the Arch logo etc - imho - it's better that > way. If you like the distro customised, do it yourself. :) > > Testing repo exists for a reason. Testing. I hope you're testing the > 2.11 packages in there, else, dont complain when something doesnt > work. The packagers cannot fix packages unless issues with them are > reported. > >> 2. Why is the KDE package installing all sorts of useless apps and >> GNOME without the gnome-extras package is barely useful... I for >> example know how to take care of things, but many user might not >> know... > > Because thats how the GNOME people designed it. KDE was designed to have > massive packages of lots of things, and its the simplest way to package > it. Same for GNOME, it's very minimal by default. > > Arch is simply installing it the way the developers designed it, and > circumventing or doing it differently, may well introduce more > problems than the non existant one it may be trying to fix. > > All the same, if someone cant recognise that they need the GNOME > Extras package for something, or cannot ask on IRC or the forums for > help with that, I dont really think that Arch is quite the distro for > them. > >> 3.If the maintainers are too busy with other stuff to produce quality >> builds of GNOME maybe we should start a small project - something like >> FreeRock and DropLine to provide the de facto standard GNOME for Arch >> Linux... > > They are quality builds...I dont have any issues with them. Bugs are > best reported at the bug tracker, or at least until I complete my > telepathy technologies. > >> That's all from me folks. I'd like to congratulate all the Arch core >> developers and maintainers which with they work have proven that they >> may be outnumbered but they are never outgunned ;) > > Here here!!! I'll agree with you there :) > >> Best Regards, >> Bozhidar > > Cheers, > > iphitus > >> P.S. I still hope that someone can give me some advise as to what is >> the problem with my current 2.10.2 installation of GNOME, if it isn't >> bad packaging... > > Hi I am having problems opening websites can you help? > We need details :) > >> _______________________________________________ >> arch mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch >> > > > -- > iphitus - www.iphitus.tk > > _______________________________________________ > arch mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch _______________________________________________ arch mailing list [email protected] http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
