Slashdot Mirror


KDE 3.2 Release Candidate 1 Debuts

danalien writes "Before a early Feb. release of the (stable) KDE 3.2, KDE has today announced the first 'Release Candidate', and hopefully the last pre-release, for its 'Open Source graphical desktop environment for Unix workstations'. Get it from download.kde.org, or use Konstruct if you don't feel like calling configure by yourself."

38 of 422 comments (clear)

  1. Hey editors: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's 'Release Kandidate'. Learn to spell.

  2. KDE most impressive open source project - ever by tljohnsn · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The progress that these guys have made in 5 years and the sheer volume of quality code is simply amazing. What are these guys doing right as compared to all the other projects? They even stick to their development and release schedules better than most commercial companies. And despite everyone calling for the death of C++, KDE is the shining example of what can be accomplished in that language. I seriously doubt it could have been constructed in any other language and produce as quick and relatively error-free code as these guys have produced.

    1. Re:KDE most impressive open source project - ever by Shaman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It helps when you have a good and simple programming environment. QT is so much easier to code in than GTK/GTK+/Glib/Bonobo that it isn't funny. Not to mention KParts.

      --
      ...Steve
    2. Re:KDE most impressive open source project - ever by RoLi · · Score: 3, Insightful
      What are these guys doing right as compared to all the other projects?

      They focus on the software, not on licensing and politics.

    3. Re:KDE most impressive open source project - ever by Shaman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Especially since it's very true. I have nothing against Gnome as a user, but as a developer? Oof.

      --
      ...Steve
    4. Re:KDE most impressive open source project - ever by jmv · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Don't you think it's a bit more complicated than that? There are two completely opposite methodologies. One was to write a new toolkit (Qt, at that time) to do everything, while the other was to reuse everything that was available (gtk from Gimp, ...) and plug different things together. In some way, I'd say KDE/Qt is closer to the Windows idea (integrated stuff), while Gnome/Gtk is closer to the unix philosophy (put lots of small packages together). I'm not saying one is better/worse, but KDE and gnome really different in terms of development philosophy.

    5. Re:KDE most impressive open source project - ever by be-fan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Erm. KDE/Qt isn't any more monolithic than GNOME/GTK+. All the stuff that GNOME has as completely seperate libraries (libxml, etc) are seperate modules of Qt. In Qt4, Qt will become even more modularized. And KDE is completely component-based. KHTML is just a component somewhere that any application can use. Contrast that to GNOME's browser, Epiphany, that doesn't use Bonobo to embed Gecko.

      KDE's development style is probably more monolithic than GNOME's, but the code is highly modular.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    6. Re:KDE most impressive open source project - ever by lokedhs · · Score: 3, Informative
      QT - Widget toolkit used by KDE. Controversial in some ways since you cannot develop commercial software with it without paying a pretty expensive license.

      GTK+ - GIMP Toolkit. The widget toolkit used by GNOME.

      Glib - GNOME utility library. Contains useful stuff like lists and hash maps.

      Bonobo - Component toolkit to allow embedding of applications in other applications.

      And before anyone flames, I've simplified, I know. But I have no idea of what the programming skills are of the parent poster.

    7. Re:KDE most impressive open source project - ever by nitehorse · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Except that the whole point of the moderation is not to downmod those you disagree with (although it happens waaay too frequently) but to engage in discussion with them to prove them wrong. :)

      FWIW, obviously I like programming with Qt and KDE much more, but I know that that's my opinion. I wouldn't ever downmod someone for having a different opinion than mine.

      -clee

    8. Re:KDE most impressive open source project - ever by Rich · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This comment is so ass-backwards as to be virtually buried in it's own behind. KDE used an existing toolkit -Qt, while Gnome decided try to make a new one based on the custom widgets used by a single app (Gimp). KDE is build on a component model where everything is a KPart and most apps result from combining them. Very few Gnome apps are Bonobo enabled. Why do people persist in making such fundamental mistakes? I would suggest it is because they haven't actually bothered to do anything as 'complicated' as build the systems and try them.

      If people on slashdot want to be taken seriously they really ought to make use of the freedom they are given and actually use some of the source code we donate.

    9. Re:KDE most impressive open source project - ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Controversial in some ways since you cannot develop commercial software with it without paying a pretty expensive license.

      No - you can't develop proprietary software with it without paying a license that's priced around average for libraries of this sort. Since it's also available under the GPL, there's nothing to stop you selling your QT software as long as it's GPL'd.

      Why is this controversial? Nobody complains that useful libraries like GNU readline are under the GPL - and in the case of readline, you don't even have the option of buying a proprietary license, because the FSF ain't selling one! But somehow that is "good", whereas the same license applied to QT is "bad".

      Posted anonymously because I really am a coward - and while I don't think the above is trolling or flamebait, I don't trust the moderators to realise. Guys, if you want to mod this down, please use "redundant", since this debate has been had to death many a time. Although given the grandparent's igorance of the issue, maybe setting out the arguments yet again isn't actually redundant for everyone.

    10. Re:KDE most impressive open source project - ever by swillden · · Score: 4, Informative

      KDE/Qt isn't any more monolithic than GNOME/GTK+. All the stuff that GNOME has as completely seperate libraries (libxml, etc) are seperate modules of Qt.

      I think the "KDE is monolithic" viewpoint arises from the excellent integration between KDE applications and the desktop. Because they all operate as though they're a single, large piece of code, people assume they are. Ironically, it's the modularity of the code base that makes such seamless integration possible for a distributed development team.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    11. Re:KDE most impressive open source project - ever by Natalie's+Hot+Grits · · Score: 4, Informative

      "The main idea remains that the idea of gnome was to to reuse as much stuff as possible (even when it shouldn't have), while KDE wrote much of these "from scratch" and has its stuff "more integrated" (just think about window managers)."

      Actually...

      According to Stallman and the GNU project, the idea of GNOME was to write a desktop to specifically replace KDE. The idea was that QT was not 100% free at the time, and the GNU project saw KDE's popularity as hurting the goals of the GNU project's operating system vision. So they started 2 projects: one to create a free replacement for QT, and another to create a replacement for the already free KDE. Since QT was GPL'd, the free replacement project was killed. But the GNOME project was already started and the developers decided to keep on working. In the process, GNOME made different choices on many aspects. Choosing to use CORBA to do their component technology was just one of the many different (than KDE's existing technology) choices the GNOME project chose. It just turns out that CORBA/bonabo (the Network Object Model part of GNOME) never got incorporated into many GNOME applications, and so now GNOME applications == GTK/glib applications.

      When you think of the GNOME project, you should think of turning a primitive incomplete widget toolkit (the Gimp ToolKit) into what GTK+ is today, plus a set of applications which use this toolkit, plus guidelines on how these applications should behave. When you think of KDE today, you should think about the same things, but using already developed QT insted of GTK+ along with the ability to embed current applications into new ones efficienatly.

      None of this has anything to do with KDE wanting to re-write everyting. In fact, they started with existing complete QT. and GNOME started with an incomplete GTK toolkit. The GNOME project is basically the GTK+ project combined with application rewriting with GTK+. So which project is the one that did the massive rewrites? I think that would be GNOME.

      If you consider writing a program using GTK+ widget set and glib a GNOME application, you probably don't know the definition of Network Object Model Environment. (Hint, several KDE applications use such features, but most "GNOME" applications don't use bonobo.)

      --
      Two infinite things: your stupidity and mine. But I'm not sure about the latter. If my sig offends you, I'm sorry.
  3. Kool. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny


    KDE is pretty kool. Aktually it's uber kool. I've konstantly kaught myself kakkling at their konstant play with K and K. Err.. K and K. Damn K and K... you know what i mean

  4. The Developers by GenomeX · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have to also say how impressed I am with the guys developing KDE. We once picked up a bug somewhere, mailed them with the problem,ect. Within a half an hour I think, they posted a patch for that specific problem. Amazing.

    1. Re:The Developers by pytheron · · Score: 4, Informative

      If you have ever worked or contributed in any way to a KDE project / KDE application, then you get some idea of just how dedicated the key people are. My own opinion of this phenomenon is that developers know (feel) that KDE is the best desktop suite we have, and we want it to be better. Also, with tools like QT Designer, and KDevelop, making applications for KDE is actually quite a pleasant experience (and this is from someone who loathes GUI programming). Well done chaps !

      --
      "I am not bound to please thee with my answers" [William Shakespeare]
    2. Re:The Developers by be-fan · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Heh. I remember once that I complained on an OSNews or Slashdot post about disliking the dotNET style's missing corner pixels. C.Lee read it and posted a reply saying he'd added an option to enable square corners! These guys are *seriously* dedicated, and props to all of them :)

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
  5. Why Open Source for Linux Only? by ewanrg · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Seems to me that one way to spread adoption would be to come up with a version of KDE that could run in place of the Windows UI but still give you the core Windows code. Meaning you can move your users that much closer to an MS free existence without losing much compatibility.

    Of course, I'm a bit known for tilting at windmills

    1. Re:Why Open Source for Linux Only? by LMCBoy · · Score: 5, Informative

      KDE does not run only on Linux, it also runs on the BSD's, Solaris, and (just recently and still in development) Mac OS X.

      --
      Liberal (adj.): Free from bigotry; open to progress; tolerant of others.
    2. Re:Why Open Source for Linux Only? by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 5, Informative
      You mean like KDE-Cygwin, or QKW? I guess in the future if these get mature enough you could replace Windows Explorer with Konqueror/KDesktop/Kicker...

      --
      main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
    3. Re:Why Open Source for Linux Only? by The+Bungi · · Score: 4, Interesting
      You can do that with today to a certain extent. You can run KDE3 within Cygwin in full-screen mode (Cygwin includes a fully functional X port), but it's... just not right. I mean, it's not nearly the same as running the real thing and although it's kind of cool it eats up way too much memory and is a bit jerky for my tastes.

      Writing a complete shell for Windows is not a particularly easy thing to do and I doubt that somehow porting KDE is viable. There are lots of shell replacements out there (Aston, GeoShell, BackBox and so on). Some are free and some are not. I've tried just about every one and for some reason or another I keep going back to Explorer after a while. It's really the little details, like not being able to open a folder view directly from the shell's Run command because the shell extension (Explorer) happens to not be loaded or the way minimized windows are managed. If you're curious you should try Geoshell. In my opinion it should be what other shells aspire to be, but even as good as it is it's still not quite there. For one thing, the entire configuration is registry-based.

      I'm no Microsoft basher, but I've always thought that opening up the shell would be the best thing they could do. After all, you'd still be running Windows underneath. But it's just too darn difficult to write your own. Explorer extensions (like the Google deskbar) are complicated, never mind a whole shell.

  6. Features by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 5, Informative
    --
    main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
    1. Re:Features by MagicM · · Score: 5, Informative

      Might want to pull that from the Google Cache

  7. run-kde-and-jam-master-jay by Limburgher · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's nice. And appropriate, since KDE is Tougher Than Leather. :)

    --

    You are not the customer.

  8. In other news... by stealth.c · · Score: 5, Funny
    Bruce Perens finally confessed that his reasons for embracing GNOME rather than KDE were "...a severe lack of Gs, and far too many Ks. All technical aspects aside, I knew RMS would roast me if I chose something that didn't start with a G."

    Honestly, I think KDE is a technical masterpiece. It gives me a GUI which can easily be configured in pretty much every conceivable way.

    GNOME, MacOS, and Windows just don't have that kind of room for personality.

  9. KDE 3.2 CVS by Massacrifice · · Score: 3, Informative

    I've been running KDE 3.2 built from CVS on 2004-01-14 for a week and so far, so good. This release should be nice. Now waiting for an ebuild...

    It's a bit faster. I wish it would be much faster. But generally when this happens I reboot in XP for a day, then I realize that speed isn't all that counts. Prelinking helps, too.

    I think I'll delete KDE 3.1.x entirely, since there is no need for it anymore.

    --
    -- Home is where you eat your heart out.
  10. stable as... by d_i_r_t_y · · Score: 4, Informative

    i've been using KDE3.2 built from source since the early alphas. even then it was rock-solid stable with just a few rough edges. once i knew all of the workarounds, i migrated my production/work environment up to 3.2 as well, for the cool/useful features. highly recommended upgrade.

  11. Next step - better apps by Ars-Fartsica · · Score: 3, Insightful

    KDE has solved the environment issue but is facing an application issue. People will compare Konq to Mozilla (which has in a way become a de facto GNOME browser), but I will call Mozilla a leader here. The Gimp DESTROYS any KDE equivalent. AbiWord and OpenOffice (soon to be Gnome-ified) blow away KOffice and Gaim also triumphs over its KDE competitors. KDevelop is the only app space I know where KDE is the clear winner.

    1. Re:Next step - better apps by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 4, Informative

      What about K3B, Quanta+, eric3, and scribus? There are tons more great KDE apps at the new KDE-Apps.org. The future of KDE application development looks bright. Remember that you're comparing KDE apps against the complete set of all other open-source applications. I think KDE is doing pretty well, myself.

      --
      main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
    2. Re:Next step - better apps by be-fan · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well, it really depends.

      I like Konq better than Epiphany (Mozilla is not GNOME app, the GNOME project's PR aside) though Epiphany does have better rendering courtesy of Gecko. However, the gap is quickly narrowing, thanks partially to Safari's rendering fixes.

      AbiWord and Gnumeric are great apps, but KOffice (the 1.3RC) is pretty competitive. And OpenOffice is to be KDE-ified in 2.x as well. That's the whole point of the NWF --- toolkit independent OpenOffice.

      I'd say that Kopete is better than Gaim. Its got much better integration with KDE than Gaim has with GNOME. The only feature that's really missing is reliable AIM file-transfer.

      The GIMP is not a GNOME app (as its developers repeatedly keep saying) so its irrelevent. Its UI is completely alien to both GNOME and KDE, so GIMP with the GTK-Qt theme is about as good as GIMP inside GNOME.

      And don't forget about Quanta, the best graphical HTML editor on Linux, as well as Kate, which is a much better programmer's editor than GEdit.

      In 3.2, Kontact should also give Evolution a run for its money. KMail in 3.2 has been getting a lot of very positive reviews.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    3. Re:Next step - better apps by Brandybuck · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's the next step for GNOME as well! Of the apps you mention, only Gaim is a truly native GNOME application. AbiWord and Gimp are next closest, since though they can built for GNOME, they can also be built standalone (which is typical for Gimp).

      Mozilla certainly isn't GNOME by a long shot, though there are GNOME browers that use the Mozilla core. And OpenOffice? Why do the GNOME guys keep saying it's a GNOME app? It clearly is not! Just because it's soon to be gnomified is meaningless, because it's soon to be qt-ified as well.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
  12. Konqueror changes from Apple? by Tengoo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Does anyone know how many of Apple's changes have made it into Konqueror?
    It would be interesting to know how useful the Safari team's contributions have been.

    1. Re:Konqueror changes from Apple? by entrigant · · Score: 5, Informative

      Many of the weekly CVS digests include merged changes from Apple. While I have no idea how many have been merged, a great deal have, and I would venture to say that the Safari team has been very helpful.

  13. Re:Gimp not integrated into GNOME???? by aussersterne · · Score: 3, Informative

    Um... No, it doesn't. GNOME uses GTK. GIMP uses GTK. That's how they're related.

    $ ldd `which gimp`
    libgtk-1.2.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgtk-1.2.so.0 (0x4002e000)
    libgdk-1.2.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgdk-1.2.so.0 (0x40139000)
    libgmodule-1.2.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgmodule-1.2.so.0 (0x40169000)
    libglib-1.2.so.0 => /usr/lib/libglib-1.2.so.0 (0x4016c000)
    libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0x40191000)
    libXi.so.6 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libXi.so.6 (0x40195000)
    libXext.so.6 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libXext.so.6 (0x4019d000)
    libX11.so.6 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libX11.so.6 (0x401ac000)
    libm.so.6 => /lib/i686/libm.so.6 (0x4028b000)
    libc.so.6 => /lib/i686/libc.so.6 (0x402ad000)
    /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x40000000)
    $

    No GNOME libraries there. Compare it to the output of:

    ldd `which gedit`

    and you'll see what I'm talking about.

    --
    STOP . AMERICA . NOW
  14. Re:My Grandma just got confused by prockcore · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You want people who know what they're doing to test it out, as they'll have a better chance to identify problems.

    I'd rather have people who don't know what they're doing test it out.. that way you'll be able to identify usability problems.

  15. Adopt every other opensource app while your at it by bogie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Funny how your picking apps that were never meant to be "Gnome" apps in the first place. These were all independant apps that were NOT built from the ground up to be Gnomified. Mozilla is the de facto "GNOME" browser? Since when? I could just as easily say "use that new neat QT wrapper thingy that makes gtk apps behave like QT apps". Who has all of the "good apps" then?

    Gnome has a habit of just picking the best apps and then "adopting" them so I don't think its fair to start saying these apps are blowing away KDE counterparts. Since when can't you run Gimp, Mozilla, OpenOffice.org in KDE? You can, thus your point is moot. Try and get over the whole Gnome or KDE has better apps thingy. Be happy that you can run any of these apps easily from any Window Manager.

    --
    If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
  16. Obligatory Monty Python sketch quote by Mjlner · · Score: 5, Funny
    Well... At least it should be obligatory...

    ..."Yes, I saw your advert in the bolour supplement."
    "The what?"
    "The bolour supplement!"
    "The colour supplement?"
    "Yes. I'm sorry I can't say the letter B."
    "C?"
    "Yes, that's right. It's all due to a trauma I suffered when I was a spoolboy. I was attacked by a bat."
    "A cat?"
    "No, a bat."
    "Can you say the letter 'K'?"
    "Oh yes. Khaki, king, kettle, Kuwait, Keble Bollege Oxford."
    "Why don't you use the letter 'K' instead of the letter 'C'?"
    "What do you mean ... spell bolour with a 'K'?"
    "Yes."
    "Kolour... Oh, that's very good, I never thought of that."

    --
    Lemon curry???