Le samedi 29 Mai 2004 23:39, Lauri Watts a ?crit : > > Thanks for that answer, Lauri. > > It probably came across a little blunter than intended (I have a habit of > that though, you're probably used to me by now :)
Ah, no, not at all. I just meant that your answer was very informative. "problem is known - no good solution at this point". It's all what I wanted to know. No second degree.... > What I would like to know is, how the distros that do have this working, > get it that way. > > One of the other things I've looked at for alternatives is quite > interesting: > > Daniel Naber (who also wrote the search routine on docs.kde.org) There is one ??? Where ? I did not find it. > has a > rather nifty little search engine (http://www.danielnaber.de/desktopdig/) > that is python based, and we would have the advantage of him being an > existing KDE developer to help with implementation :) Right now though, we > can't rely on an up to date version of the py-qt or py-kde bindings being > available across the board or along with a new release of KDE. We can be > more sure about python itself being available, and desktop dig only needs > the bindings for the GUI, so maybe there's a way to put another gui on it. > > There's several other interesting looking apps around, and it's a while > (maybe a year or so) since I took a really hard look around at them. Maybe > there's something else out there that isn't ht://dig and isn't insanely > complex to get set up, that could be used. Well, perharps I'm wrong, but I don't see that as a problem of "the right tool". It's rather a problem of philosophy : where do we dig, is it associated with packages, should it have something to do with scrollkeeper, etc... Once we know what to do, the tools are not really a problem, are they ? -- MADE?IN?TURKEY?--?FABRIQU??EN?DINDE (veste en coton achet?e au Qu?bec - 2001)
