It seems like at least kdeedu, kdegames, kdepim kdetoys wouldn't
leave me missing really obvious stuff, at least from the names. It
would seem that kdeadmin, kdebase, kdebase-pam, kdelibs, kdemultimedia
possibly kdeutils would be keepers. The rest I don't have an
uneducated opinion on.
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 18:49:37 +0200, Ryan Viljoen wrote:
These are the monolithic ebuilds, kdepim for example contains kmail,
kontact and quite a few others. Use the split ebuilds to merge just
what you need.
It's a little confusing because the split and monolithic ebuilds are
all in
Paul S. Bains wrote:
You are not being dense - unused code does nothing but take up disc space.
Well, the code _can_ be loaded, without being executed, and therefore
taking up RAM.
-Kristian Poul Herkild
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Paul S. Bains wrote:
You are not being dense - unused code does nothing but take up disc
space.
That's not correct. It offers the potential of being
executed and thus, it offers the potential of being
a security threat. Thus it is better to NOT have the
code around at all.
Alexander Skwar
All right, my turn to congratulate KDE on doing such a fine job.
--rant arg=slight--
I have been using Linux (Gentoo at that) for over 6 yrs. During that
time I have tried Gnome, KDE, and XFCE off and on. After spending
some time with each (2-3 weeks) I would always go back to a plain
window
Uncompiled code is not loaded into ram because it is only text. The
exception is when you are editing it..! Unless I've been compiling all
these years for no reason...:) Code must actually be compiled into a
binary and called in one way or another to be loaded into ram.
If you mean
Perhaps I misunderstood the poster - unused, uncompiled code cannot be
loaded into RAM, unless you editing it. Unused compiled code can, but
that is beyond the realm of the user. If the developer has functions
that are not ever being used, then that's the developer's fault.
On 01/22/06
I forgot interpreted code - maybe that's what the original poster
meant. I am used to only working with compiled binaries only.
On 01/22/06 08:47:38, Paul S. Bains wrote:
Perhaps I misunderstood the poster - unused, uncompiled code cannot
be loaded into RAM, unless you editing it. Unused
On 1/22/06, Paul S. Bains [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Uncompiled code is not loaded into ram because it is only text. The
exception is when you are editing it..! Unless I've been compiling all
these years for no reason...:) Code must actually be compiled into a
binary and called in one way or
Paul S. Bains wrote:
Perhaps I misunderstood the poster - unused, uncompiled code cannot be
loaded into RAM, unless you editing it.
Yep.
Unused compiled code can, but
that is beyond the realm of the user.
No, it's not. IIRC, this thread at some point of time was
about setting USE
On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 06:57:17 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
Not sure I have the stomach to keep something this large up to date.
emerge -uavDN world
Keeping KDE up to date is no more or less effort than keeping GNOME up to
date.
--
Neil Bothwick
WinErr 00F: Unexplained error - Please tell us
On 1/22/06, Neil Bothwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 06:57:17 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
Not sure I have the stomach to keep something this large up to date.
emerge -uavDN world
Keeping KDE up to date is no more or less effort than keeping GNOME up to
date.
--
Neil
On Sunday 22 January 2006 16:57, Mark Knecht wrote:
Is there no 'kde-light' to get me the environment without all the
zillions of apps, etc.?
Yes, with kde split ebuilds it's actually possible to build a light kde
system. Just emerge kdebase-startkde and build from there adding the
apps you
On Sunday 22 January 2006 17:38, Derek Tracy wrote:
wish that Amarok handled Podcasts with more flexibility and allowed me
to create playlists and such automaticlaly on my iPod (problem solved
by not using Amarok and using bashpodder / gnupod).
Check back with amaroK 1.4 and you will have
On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 07:57:15 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
Keeping KDE up to date is no more or less effort than keeping GNOME
up to date.
Certainly no more effort, but it seems that it's possibly much more
compute time which would get in the way of me running real time audio
on my machines.
On 22 January 2006 19:35, Abhay Kedia wrote:
The will probably be dropping aRts in KDE 4
Make that certainly. Arts is dead.
Uwe
--
Unix is sexy:
who | grep -i blonde | date
cd ~; unzip; touch; strip; finger
mount; gasp; yes; uptime; umount
sleep
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
On Sunday 22 January 2006 20:05, Uwe Thiem wrote:
On 22 January 2006 19:35, Abhay Kedia wrote:
The will probably be dropping aRts in KDE 4
Make that certainly. Arts is dead.
Where are we having the wake. I'll chip in for a few beers, I'd like to make
sure its properly buried.
--
Big Tone
On 1/22/06, Neil Bothwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 07:57:15 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
Keeping KDE up to date is no more or less effort than keeping GNOME
up to date.
Certainly no more effort, but it seems that it's possibly much more
compute time which would get in
On Sat, Jan 21, 2006 at 12:56:47AM +0100, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Saturday 21 January 2006 00:44, Alan E. Davis wrote:
May I ask others' experiences with e17? I just wasted my holiday
installing e17 on two of three machines. It is smaller than Kde, but
background is 20% of cpu .
On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 15:12:09 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
It seems like at least kdeedu, kdegames, kdepim kdetoys wouldn't
leave me missing really obvious stuff, at least from the names. It
would seem that kdeadmin, kdebase, kdebase-pam, kdelibs, kdemultimedia
possibly kdeutils would be
It's nice of you to give me so detailed explanation!
I think I would like to use gnome for long time ^_^
Thank you very much
50 mails later, 5 flame wars and just for that... I do believe it
would of been easier to give each of them a test yourself to see what
you prefer. KDE, Fluxbox,
On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 01:06:09 +0100, Holly Bostick wrote:
That may be true, but it assumes that I want a Desktop Environment in
the first place, which I don't, particularly.
Then why are you participating in a discussion about which of the two
complete Desktop environments is best? ;-)
As you
b.n. schreef:
I'm just writing it for the sake of curiosity, so no flaming is here.
Just because some answer sound quite sarcastic, but that's just a
style thing to get it short. :)
Yes, but you then have bloat (because Konqueror contains web
browsing features that you are not using,
Alan E. Davis wrote:
But one glaring deficiency keeps hitting me in the face---you
can't do links with them.
With Konq you can: hold Ctrl+Shift while dragging and dropping a
file.
(But that's only symlinks, and surely you wish to do hard links
too. :)
Benno
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org
AybOwan!
Argument doesn't allow truth to come out
-Load Buddha-
so no matter all are opensources, let them to think...
On 1/21/06, Benno Schulenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alan E. Davis wrote:
But one glaring deficiency keeps hitting me in the face---you
can't do links with them.
With
If I wanted unused and unneccessary code sitting on my PC, I'd use a
binary distribution. Why do I bother with disabling USE flags to not
compile code that is unnecessary for me, if I didn't care about such
things? On the rare occasions that I compile Mozilla (becoming less and
less necessary,
On 1/20/06, Linux Java [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's nice of you to give me so detailed explanation!
I think I would like to use gnome for long time ^_^
Thank you very much
Some advice for etiquette on this list:
1. Don't top post.
2. _DON'T_ post html messages
3. Learn to trim the message
KDE and GNOME, from a user perspective, are about identical, except
that KDE has a couple more bells and whistles.
Now, if you're hacking code, it comes down to which windowing API you
want to use. Of course, the user has the libraries for all of the
popular ones loaded anyway, so, again, it
On Saturday 21 January 2006 05:36, Holly Bostick wrote:
That may be true, but it assumes that I want a Desktop Environment in
the first place, which I don't, particularly.
Ermm...if you don't want a Desktop Environment then why install K Desktop
Environment in the first place and then why get
On 1/21/06, Justin Hart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
KDE and GNOME, from a user perspective, are about identical, except
that KDE has a couple more bells and whistles.
Not true from _this_ users's perspective.
-Richard
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
On 21 January 2006 16:50, Holly Bostick wrote:
That's not the point, which is where we have a failure to communicate.
Openbox and FVWM-crystal (and ICEwm, for that matter) are lighter,
faster desktops than KDE partially because they do not contain the code
to put icons on the desktop (whether
On 21 January 2006 16:50, Holly Bostick wrote:
So for all of
me, they could have done something else with that time (like make the
code modular, so if I didn't want it, I could disable it with a USE flag
or something,
Forgot this in my other mail:
When I looked last time, konqueror contained
Hi,
I have only one question:
how do you deal with the data-eating bugs, nautilus is known for?
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 18:07:06 +, Justin Hart wrote:
KDE and GNOME, from a user perspective, are about identical,
If that were true, it would be impossible to start a DE flamewar among
users.
PS vi and emacs are the same :)
--
Neil Bothwick
WinErr 020: Error recording error codes -
On Saturday 21 January 2006 14:46, a tiny voice compelled Neil Bothwick to
write:
PS vi and emacs are the same
OH MY GOD NO! Not that again.
--
Regards, Ernie
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
On Sunday 22 January 2006 00:02, Ernie Schroder wrote:
On Saturday 21 January 2006 14:46, a tiny voice compelled Neil Bothwick to
write:
PS vi and emacs are the same
OH MY GOD NO! Not that again.
why not?
he is correct.
Both were made to drive their users crazy.
vi with stupid
On Sat, Jan 21, 2006 at 04:48:24AM +, b.n. wrote
Ehm. Perhaps it's me being dense but: who cares about unused code? Ok,
you have unnecessary, unused code sitting on your HD: where's the
problem? You never see it.
A year ago, I was using a 1999 Dell (128 megs RAM, 450 mhz PIII) as my
You are not being dense - unused code does nothing but take up disc
space.
On 01/21/06 19:34:02, Walter Dnes wrote:
On Sat, Jan 21, 2006 at 04:48:24AM +, b.n. wrote
Ehm. Perhaps it's me being dense but: who cares about unused code?
Ok,
you have unnecessary, unused code sitting on your
On Sat, 2006-01-21 at 11:05 -0700, Richard Fish wrote:
Some advice for etiquette on this list:
1. Don't top post.
2. _DON'T_ post html messages
3. Learn to trim the message you are replying to.
-Richard
Thank you for your advice!
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
On Fri, 2006-01-20 at 07:17 -0700, Richard Fish wrote:
On 1/20/06, Linux Java [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wanna to know KDE and Gnome which is more popular.
Linus recommends you use KDE.
http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/desktop_architects/2005-December/000390.html
Don't take me wrong, i
Walter Dnes wrote:
A year ago, I was using a 1999 Dell (128 megs RAM, 450 mhz PIII) as my
main machine. I still have it around as my emergency backup. KDE
runs (would you believe crawls) painfully slowly on that machine.
Using blackbox plus fbpanel, it's perfectly OK for most stuff, except
Linux Java wrote:
I wanna to know KDE and Gnome which is more popular.
I use KDE. I tried Gnome and didn't like it. Some people with
older/slower systems like Gnome or some other light desktops.
It really isn't about what others like, it's about what you like.
Install them both, login and
quoth the Linux Java:
I wanna to know KDE and Gnome which is more popular.
Unscientific:
Google for:
kde rules -- 40,900
kde sucks -- 9,660
gnome rules -- 554
gnome sucks -- 10,500
Draw your own conclusions.
-d
--
darren kirby :: Part of the problem since 1976 :: http://badcomputer.org
...the
I use KDE. I tried Gnome and didn't like it. Some people with
Me too. I've given Gnome a try several times (the latest on a recent
Ubuntu Live CD, and I just don't like the whole look and feel as much
as KDE, which is great IMHO.
--
Ant...
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 17:10:13 +0800, Linux Java wrote:
I wanna to know KDE and Gnome which is more popular.
Why? Use whatever suits you.
If you want to use the most popular desktop, you probably need WinXP :)
--
Neil Bothwick
Everything takes longer than expected, even when you take
into
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 17:10:13 +0800, Linux Java wrote:
I wanna to know KDE and Gnome which is more popular.
Why? Use whatever suits you.
If you want to use the most popular desktop, you probably need WinXP :)
Which really sucks by the way. LOL It's worse
to get the most out of kde run the following commands :emerge -C kdeemerge gnome-lite:Pok flame awayOn 1/20/06, Ryan Viljoen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:I use Fluxbox but have been experimenting with KDE
3.5. I must say Ireally like it however it is not the complete KDE I emerged all theapps that I
Anthony Roy skrev:
I use KDE. I tried Gnome and didn't like it. Some people with
Me too. I've given Gnome a try several times (the latest on a recent
Ubuntu Live CD, and I just don't like the whole look and feel as much
as KDE, which is great IMHO.
--
Ant...
I prefer Gnome, but KDE has
Ryan Viljoen wrote:
I use Fluxbox but have been experimenting with KDE 3.5. I must say I
really like it however it is not the complete KDE I emerged all the
apps that I use and then emerged kdebase so I have the very very basic
KDE system without all the other rubbish and bloatware that you get.
Paul wrote:
to get the most out of kde run the following commands :
emerge -C kde
emerge gnome-lite
:P
ok flame away
cough cough Can we assume you don't like KDE? LOL
No flames here. I'm to pissed at kppp at the moment. I can only get
mad at one thing/person at a time. o_O
my findings with KDE is that its bloadwareif I wanted bloat , I'd run windowsGnome-lite is just that , lightIt serves my purposes fine and the menus are easy to edit to my liking.
On 1/20/06, Dale [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Paul wrote: to get the most out of kde run the following commands : emerge
On Friday 20 January 2006 12:11, Dale wrote:
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 17:10:13 +0800, Linux Java wrote:
I wanna to know KDE and Gnome which is more popular.
Why? Use whatever suits you.
If you want to use the most popular desktop, you probably need WinXP :)
Which really
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:37:57 +0200, Paul wrote:
to get the most out of kde run the following commands :
emerge -C kde
emerge gnome-lite
:P
ok flame away
For what, pushing GNOME or top posting with full quotes?
--
Neil Bothwick
Oops. My brain just hit a bad sector.
signature.asc
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 14:00:51 +0200, Paul wrote:
my findings with KDE is that its bloadware
if I wanted bloat , I'd run windows
Gnome-lite is just that , light
So a small part of GNOME is less bloated than all of KDE? That's a
revelation!
--
Neil Bothwick
Life Support System Failure -
Am Freitag, 20. Januar 2006 13:00 schrieb ext Paul:
my findings with KDE is that its bloadware
if I wanted bloat , I'd run windows
I've heard rumours there are split ebuilds for KDE *SCNR*
Bye...
Dirk
--
Dirk Heinrichs | Tel: +49 (0)162 234 3408
Configuration Manager |
Couldnt resist adding my 2p
I prefer to spend my configuring time ie. admin on the Big picture
eg. setting up mail, apache, firewall, ...
For the little things eg. desktop background one click icons to start
daily apps and so on I am happy to let others give me a pleasent
default.
So what
quoth the Paul:
my findings with KDE is that its bloadware
Right. It takes code to make software usable ;)
if I wanted bloat , I'd run windows
You seem to be implying that the only problem with windows is its size...
Gnome-lite is just that , light
So is fat-free ice cream, but I wouldn't
On 1/20/06, Linux Java [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wanna to know KDE and Gnome which is more popular.
Linus recommends you use KDE.
http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/desktop_architects/2005-December/000390.html
-Richard
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Neil Bothwick schreef:
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 17:10:13 +0800, Linux Java wrote:
I wanna to know KDE and Gnome which is more popular.
Why? Use whatever suits you.
I hope that you all appreciate my extreme restraint in not posting to
this thread until now, given how very much I dislike KDE.
On Fri, 2006-01-20 at 04:11 -0600, Dale wrote:
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 17:10:13 +0800, Linux Java wrote:
I wanna to know KDE and Gnome which is more popular.
Why? Use whatever suits you.
If you want to use the most popular desktop, you probably need
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 07:17:43 -0700, Richard Fish wrote
Linus recommends you use KDE.
http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/desktop_architects/2005-December/000390.html
-Richard
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Yup, and that's because he can't do what _he_ wants to. His complaints have
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 08:37:47 -0600, Michael Sullivan wrote:
My wife and I use GNOME. KDE is too Windows-like for us.
I always thought Windows was rather KDE-like in some ways, but that's
probably because I used KDE before windows.
--
Neil Bothwick
Any sufficiently advanced bug is
My wife and I use KDE. I, mainly because I don't see the point in
having multiple GUIs (they're not that facinating to me (other than to
get into the source code), but for my wife, I find that for someone
coming from using Windows, it seems that out of the box, KDE seems to
have a stronger appeal
I wanna to know KDE and Gnome which is more popular.
Linus recommends you use KDE.
http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/desktop_architects/2005-December/000390.html
I've been using KDE for years but switched to Gnome recently.
Though I'm still using Kate. It's a matter of taste. Try them both.
my findings with KDE is that its bloadware
if I wanted bloat , I'd run windows
Gnome-lite is just that , light
It serves my purposes fine and the menus are easy to edit to my liking.
Ah! What gnome-lite is for gnome is what kdebase is for KDE.
emerge kdebase doesnt install all the rest of
On Friday 20 January 2006 13:00, Paul wrote:
my findings with KDE is that its bloadware
if I wanted bloat , I'd run windows
KDE is not bloated, it is feature complete, fully integrated (while gnome is a
collection of third party applications) and while gnome takes away choices,
KDE enables
On Friday 20 January 2006 15:37, Michael Sullivan wrote:
My wife and I use GNOME. KDE is too Windows-like for us. I can't stand
Windows XP. I think it's the most annoying OS I've ever attempted to
use...
gnome is much more windows like than KDE.
With KDE you have lots and lots of options
AybOwan!
i'm too using KDE. it's nice... colorfull world...
On 1/21/06, Hemmann, Volker Armin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 20 January 2006 15:37, Michael Sullivan wrote:
My wife and I use GNOME. KDE is too Windows-like for us. I can't stand
Windows XP. I think it's the most
On Friday 20 January 2006 19:59, Holly Bostick wrote:
more comfortable with a more Windows-like environment, and Windows-like
assumptions about what a user wants/needs from their desktop, KDE may be
just the thing; that is, after all, what it's designed to do to a great
extent.
That statement
On Friday 20 January 2006 21:08, Alexander Kirillov wrote:
and better integrated with other open source projects out there.
That is not a quality of Gnome but GTK. Gnome uses GTK while KDE uses QT.
Since (earlier) QT had a non-acceptable license for most of the developers of
FLOSS, they chose
On Friday 20 January 2006 15:01, darren kirby wrote:
Unscientific:
Google for:
kde rules -- 40,900
kde sucks -- 9,660
gnome rules -- 554
gnome sucks -- 10,500
Draw your own conclusions.
..or we could always use googlefight ;)
On Friday 20 January 2006 22:02, Abhay Kedia wrote:
On Friday 20 January 2006 15:01, darren kirby wrote:
Unscientific:
Google for:
kde rules -- 40,900
kde sucks -- 9,660
gnome rules -- 554
gnome sucks -- 10,500
Draw your own conclusions.
..or we could always use googlefight ;)
and better integrated with other open source projects out there.
That is not a quality of Gnome but GTK. Gnome uses GTK while KDE uses QT.
Since (earlier) QT had a non-acceptable license for most of the developers of
FLOSS, they chose GTK over QT. This lead to more and more applications being
On 1/20/06, Linux Java [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wanna to know KDE and Gnome which is more popular.
I used Gnome for years (5 or 6 maybe?), but have recently switched to
kde-3.4 and then now kde-3.5. For me, I wanted to try something
different, and it is a nice change. I may swap back
I wanna to know KDE and Gnome which is more popular.
I wanna know how interesting such a discussion is ;-))) .
Please resist to develop a flame war from this topic. Better enjoy open
source, regardless if it is KDE, Gnome, OSS, ALSA, OpenOffice.org or
Koffice etc., simply enjoy the times we
On 1/21/06, Mike Owen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
even go back to Afterstep or Enlightenment, but for now kde-3.5 works
for me.
May I ask others' experiences with e17? I just wasted my holiday
installing e17 on two of three machines. It is smaller than Kde, but
background is 20% of cpu .
On Saturday 21 January 2006 00:44, Alan E. Davis wrote:
On 1/21/06, Mike Owen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
even go back to Afterstep or Enlightenment, but for now kde-3.5 works
for me.
May I ask others' experiences with e17? I just wasted my holiday
installing e17 on two of three machines.
060121 Alan E. Davis wrote:
But one glaring deficiency keeps hitting me in the face
-- you can't do links with them.
AFAIK Krusader can create links quite readily: look at its manual.
--
,,
SUPPORT ___//___,
Abhay Kedia schreef:
On Friday 20 January 2006 19:59, Holly Bostick wrote:
more comfortable with a more Windows-like environment, and
Windows-like assumptions about what a user wants/needs from their
desktop, KDE may be just the thing; that is, after all, what it's
designed to do to a
The bottom line on GUIs is ease of use. The tradeoff is flexibility
and options.
I have NEVER, EVER understood why dumbing down things means making them
easy to use. That's a line of reasoning that gets me mad.
Look, the Advanced tab/dialog/whatever is not exactly a new invention.
m.
--
I myself don't see it as minimal fuss, not least because KDE makes so
many choices for me in its feature richness that I have to spend two
hours (I'm being kind) finding all the bloody options that I don't want
and change them or turn them off or whatever.
Sorry, I simply can't understand what
On Friday 20 January 2006 06:40, a tiny voice compelled Kristian Poul Herkild
to write:
Anthony Roy skrev:
I use KDE. I tried Gnome and didn't like it. Some people with
Me too. I've given Gnome a try several times (the latest on a recent
Ubuntu Live CD, and I just don't like the whole
b.n. schreef:
I myself don't see it as minimal fuss, not least because KDE
makes so many choices for me in its feature richness that I have
to spend two hours (I'm being kind) finding all the bloody options
that I don't want and change them or turn them off or whatever.
Sorry, I simply
On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 09:44:19 +1000
Alan E. Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
May I ask others' experiences with e17? I just wasted my holiday
installing e17 on two of three machines. It is smaller than Kde, but
background is 20% of cpu . Buggy. Beautiful. A PITA to configure,
and menus
It's nice of you to give me so detailed explanation!
I think I would like to use gnome for long time ^_^
Thank you very much
On Fri, 2006-01-20 at 15:29 +0100, Holly Bostick wrote:
Neil Bothwick schreef:
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 17:10:13 +0800, Linux Java wrote:
I wanna to know KDE and Gnome
I'm just writing it for the sake of curiosity, so no flaming is here.
Just because some answer sound quite sarcastic, but that's just a
style thing to get it short. :)
Yes, but you then have bloat (because Konqueror contains web browsing
features that you are not using, therefore the code is
86 matches
Mail list logo
