On Sun, 18 Aug 2002 04:13, Thierry Vignaud wrote: > Leon Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Having read your reasoning, the idea of replacing Mandrake with >> RedHat is loopy, on a server or elsewhere. RedHat offer you less >> choices than Mandrake. Mandrake and SuSe, for example, _prefer_ KDE >> and so write most of their tools to it. RedHat essentially >> *requires* GNOME, militantly markets GNOME-alone.
> err, we don't prefer kde or gnome, all our stuff are made to works > with both (unified menu through wm methods, common desktop icons, ...) True, and exactly the general point I was making in differentiating between Mdk and RH, but - Hmmm. A lot of it works better under KDE, and KDE is the default WM for Mandrake installations. > as for our toos, they're not written for kde; in fact, they use gtk+ > since: > - libgtk+ is small (1.5Mb) while libqt is 6.6Mb > - libgtk+ doesn't means have gnome libs installed which is not true > for libqt > - there's still no decent perl-Qt binding (but david faure is working > on it) PyQt is available. (-: Also Ruby has Qt bindings but I haven't checked them out. :-) > - we (mandrake developers) have better knowledge of gtk+ than qt > - we already have a code base extending perl-Gtk to get a usable > toolkit (my_gtk/ugtk) Yes, PERL. Ah, well, in its favour: it seems to be actually working. (-: > - we already have a code base providing abstraction in the config > tools for implementation into Gtk, Newt and stdio (interactive) > the rest of your post had have bad side effects on our ego :-) I'd have thought that the rapidly growing number of people using your distro would have left little room for, er, side effects. (-: Cheers; Leon
