Alexander E. Patrakov wrote: > Xfce version in BLFS is ancient, and a new version is a totally > different desktop. Some months ago I posted an update to the BLFS Xfce > page. Since then, I have made some changes. The resulting draft is > attached as an XML file. No diff, because this is essentially a full > rewrite of the existing page. Please make useful comments and attempt > to fix FIXMEs. This way, the Xfce update in BLFS will take place sooner. > > OTOH, if nobody is interested, I insist that Xfce has to be removed > from the book.
I changed my opinion. Xfce will be removed unconditionally, because of bugs. The following bugs are listed in my XML file: http://www.nabble.com/Re:--Libical--libical-0.27-is-now-available-t3444157.html http://bugzilla.xfce.org/show_bug.cgi?id=783 http://bugzilla.xfce.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2891 http://bugzilla.xfce.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2968 http://bugzilla.xfce.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2789 The following bugs are not linked to, but still described: http://bugzilla.xfce.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2871 http://bugzilla.xfce.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2020 The following bug will show up with GTK-2.12.x (was noticed only because I am subscribed to Debian lists): http://bugzilla.xfce.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3346 Anyway, BLFS is still at GTK+-2.10.3, but enough people will deviate, use an updated GTK+ version, and send mail to the support list. -- Alexander E. Patrakov -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
