Slashdot Mirror


KDE & GNOME Cooperate

||Plazm|| writes " Here's an interesting article on what's in the future for these two dev platforms. Maybe they can play nice after all... 'This past week, there has been an impressive show of cooperation between the KDE and GNOME projects involving prominent hackers from both camps. The initial subject of discussion was concerning a common network-connection manager that would enable applications to detect whether an internet connection was currently available or not; both projects had already been working on the issue including two independent efforts from KDE developers Bjoern Kahl and Matt Koss. The discussion diverged to the larger issue of making GNOME and KDE play nice together including related CORBA matters.' "

217 comments

  1. Re:KDE/GNOME by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think that is quite important really. If
    it had been impossible to compare an application with something similar, it would be more
    difficult to get refinements all the time.
    Competion is not that bad after all.

    (I develop KDE/Qt apps)

  2. What the hell are you talking about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What does that have to do with 2 free desktop projects?

    1. Re:What the hell are you talking about? by J4 · · Score: 1

      Duh. smoke another blunt

    2. Re:What the hell are you talking about? by Millennium · · Score: 2

      Consider the Gnome/KDE sflamewars. Those of us who kept our heads all wanted to see the two cooperate, but I don't think anyone honestly believed it would ever happen.

      Therefore, two other things that aren't likely to happen but should: M$ going bankrupt and MacOS getting a bit of respect among the geek community.

  3. Re:They've got CORBA on the brain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Several developers have also mentioned the non-CORBA option. Compatibility with apps that do not do CORBA is a goal as well.

  4. It comes with E by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Evidently it's on the ftp server in the 1.0 dir.

  5. The danger already exists, even in *nix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can write shell scripts that mail themselves to users, already. How's using the 'mail' command any different from using MAPI?

    Besides, even email viruses are possible under Unix, at least if you use Emacs to read mail. You can add a local variables list to the bottom of an email, and when someone reads it, you can put in an eval pseudovariable in the list to execute arbitrary code.

    Unless you've put something like

    (setq enable-local-variables 'query)

    in your .emacs file, you're vulnerable to this. I seriously doubt very many people have done this....

  6. this is not bickering. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have _plenty_ of bones to pick with Miguel, but this is not one of them.

    THis is a technical explanation, that Miguel gave in response to a question. It does not affect interoperability significantly; one desktop's way of doing things will not interfere with the other. In fact, I see Miguel's point.

    Please do not make problems where there are none.

    -A KDE user.

  7. Re:Finally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Strange, I leave X running for months and months and don't see any memory leaks... what version/hardware, etc are you using?

  8. Re:Finnally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's keeping you? I built a little $500 computer for my mom a couple months ago and installed Linux on it. She never used a computer before and has caught on quite quickly and easily and she loves it. Linux being hard to use for the end user is a myth, the problem comes from people already knowing how to do things one way and learning another. This is no different from a Mac user learning to use Windows for example.

  9. Re:his last name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think it's Paddingtown

  10. Re:Finally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I get memory leaks in the Matrox driver, but mostly only with KDE (it swells up to almost 128MB in less than 24 hours!).

  11. Re:GPL misinterpretation, part MCXII by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a rather naive idea of "the exact situation". The GPL has clauses that will allow you to combine GPL code with more restricted code as well. See the system library clause for example.

    Please, if you are not a lawyer, do not pretend to be one and it will cause less confusion.

  12. Perhaps a windowing system would be good? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone that has ever programmed on the win32
    platform is aware of the central messaging
    scheme that is in use.
    While win32 programming takes forever and is
    a pain in the ass (imho), perhaps a messaging
    system like this would be good for X, and
    could allow apps to easily talk to each other,
    no matter if they are a k-app, or a gnome app.

  13. Re:This is what we need to see more of... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What do you mean by "for the most part separate ways in how each interacts with X"? That is plain wrong and that was plain wrong. There was _never_ a problem in running a KDE application with other window managers, and their was never a problem in running a gnome application with the KDE windowmanager.

    Why is nonsense like this repeated over and over again? What about simply _trying it out_? ;-)

  14. Why Re:The Linux community is maturing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Both of these are OpenSource projects.

    Why is it the LINUX community that is 'maturing'?

    Why is it "ust about guarantees that Linux will be appreciated and used more and
    more as a primary desktop platform. "

    What about *BSD? Or using KDE/GNOME on SCO? Ori on .....

    This OpenSource movement is BIGGER than *JUST* GNU/Linux. Or GNU, or Linux.

    Think of it: The OpenSource methodology was able to get one of the most CLOSED computer companies out there...Apple...to sign on and (basicly) say "This OpenSource (BSD) is GOOD enough to REPLACE what we were going to do with BSD."

    Try thinking with a bigger scope than just 'linux'.

    1. Re:Why Re:The Linux community is maturing. by LinuxGeek · · Score: 2

      I didn't say it was *just* the Linux community that is maturing. I was refering to the people that develop and lead the Linux community, not Linux itself. I think that is an important distinction. The *BSD community seems to have a reputation for a little more level headed leadership overall than some of the Linux segments do. I don't really see what you got riled up about.

      An understanding of software as complex as an operating system and support applications isn't easy to come by. Many people don't trust the Linux and OpenSource communities because they see the bickering and wonder if it will last. They stick with what is the 'standard' because they are sure it has a future. The more that we can put aside our minor differences of opinion about methodology and approach and focus on the large issues that we agree on, the more progress and support will grow. That is much easier to implement on new projects, but is possible on existing work.

      Just so you know, I have an official OpenBSD 2.5 CD pack sitting in front of me and parts on order to finish a third system to run it on. I bought it from the OpenBSD booth at Linux Expo '99. I bet they would be confused by your attitude and response too.

      --

      Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
    2. Re:Why Re:The Linux community is maturing. by AArthur · · Score: 1

      They are trying to do that.

      KDE already works pretty good on lesser known *nixes, such as SC0, AIX, or *BSD.

      GNOME has some worked need on this portablity, I am sure this will happen in the future. GNOME has some little issues on big endian systems, such as the PowerPC. It also has some problems with certain OSes.

      Niether one of them compiles easily enought on systems that use cc instead of gcc, but I think they are people working on those issues.

      That's a problem in general with the Linux community, most developers lack the resources to extensively test on commerical properity systems or on cc instead of gnu c compilers.

      Re: Apple Issue

      Apple chose to work with FreeBSD and NetBSD developers to create the foundation for Mac OS X, because at the last minute they realized that this mach stuff wasn't going any wheres quickly. They have worked hard to create a *BSD, known as Darwin that uses the best parts of Mach, that they spent millions of dollars on, but still use the speed of *BSD. The Darwin project, was a natural reaction to work with *BSD developers, since it allowed community influence on their server base.

      Wheither I agree with it or not, that's a whole another issue (maybe I am just to gpl biased).

  15. this is probably stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But why not have ip-up and ip-down set a variable to ONLINE and OFFLINE? and system startup script to set it to OFFLINE.. That's what I'm doing for my bash prompt line.. it looks like this:

    (time)-(date)-(Online)
    (~)-$

    And with nice colors :0)


    - Rainy

    1. Re:this is probably stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This would not work for people who must use a http proxy server, firewall, and a few other situations, where the other end could be up or down. I personnally connect through an http proxy server. The ideas behind this program would take this into account.

      Also, I think the idea behind this KDE app is a bit more complicated than simply determining if you have a connection going or not.

      For simple things, though, I think there wouldn't be nothing wrong with having an enviroment variable. It just doesn't accomplish everything that needs done.

    2. Re:this is probably stupid.. by scrytch · · Score: 2

      > But why not have ip-up and ip-down set a variable to ONLINE and OFFLINE?

      Because tripping over the phone cord and yanking it out does not call ip-down, that's why. In any case there IS a program that will notify a process when an interface goes down, but I forgot what it is. It also appears to need a separate instance of this process for every program that wants to watch the interface status.

      --
      I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
  16. Sanity at last? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    KDE and GNOME have every reason to work together. If they fail to, they risk killing themselves off, potentially taking linux with them. As far as I can see, the people displaying the most fervent religious convictions are users who don't code for either project. With any luck we'll get 2 functionally equivalent desktops to satisfy both sides.

    1. Re:Sanity at last? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are forgetting something. They can't kill linux because linux can not be killed. It does not need marketshare to survive. It is not a corporation and it can not go bankrupt. KDE and GNOME can only help Linux it will just take time. Since Linux has not bottom lines to worry about time is something we have a lot of. Linux existed before either of these things existed and before the current hype and when the hype ends it will continue to exist.

  17. diald?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't we have a perfectly good program to do this? (I actually wrote a Gnome panel applet to control it 'nicely', if that's the problem)

    Go ahead and reinvent wheels if you get a kick out of it though, I guess..

    Daniel

    1. Re:diald?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are other issues not handled by diald, such as notifying applications when the line goes up or down.

    2. Re:diald?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you for your..um...mature and..er..
      Ach, never mind. I can't do it with a straight face.

      But I still agree, there are some good reasons to build a replacement. I still take issue, however, with making it Gnome-specific. It should be a background daemon like diald.

      Daniel
      (btw, thank you for pointing out that diald is Linux-only. I forgot)

    3. Re:diald?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks. Point taken :-)

      Daniel

    4. Re:diald?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *thwacks self*

      Doh. It isn't Gnome-specific. That's the point.

      Daniel [wondering how many people will ignore my correction and flame me anyway. 1..2.. heck, this is /., why not 600? ]

    5. Re:diald?? by Mawbid · · Score: 0

      Hmm...
      I wonder if this thread could be any dumber...
      Ah-ha!
      BOEWULF!
      Yup, sure can!
      --

      --
      Fuck the system? Nah, you might catch something.
    6. Re:diald?? by Alex+Zepeda · · Score: 1

      Oh please, if you wanna take issue with reinventing the wheel, take a look at Gnome, take your head out of your ass, and then comment.

      Right now, I have no plans to use pppd or Linux at all, and so diald would be useless for me. Oh but that's right, Gnome is Linux only, right?

      --
      The revolution will be mocked
  18. Re:Finally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I get memory leaks in the Matrox driver, but mostly only with KDE (it swells up to almost 128MB in less than 24 hours!).

    This typically occurs when applications forget to free resources such as XPMs, etc., at closing.

  19. it is stupid, but understandable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The reason not to use an environmental variable is
    that already-running apps are not notified. I think
    that criticizing this sort of stuff before it's built is really
    a bad idea. If you don't like it, then don't use it
    or come up with something better. For the most part,
    though, these guys know full well what they're doing,
    as evidenced by the quality so far of GNOME and KDE
    both. Just kut them some gslack.

  20. Harmony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The compettion between KDE and GNOME seemed to have it's good points. One of the jabs that GNOME supporters had against KDE was the license that the Qt widget set was under. As a side effect, the entire implimentation of the widget set was questions and a project to make a *thread-safe* widget set under FSF licensing was created call Harmony. Since then, Troll Tech has addressed the Qt widget licensing issue. Unfortantly, Harmony seems to have died with the birth of FreeQt. Does anyone know if either of these desktops will be structured around a thread-safe API? Also, does anyone know if someone else has picked up development of the Harmony project? Harmony's own offical "updated daily" status web page has layed dormate since Novemember of last year. The Harmony mailing list appears to have also trickled down to the point of complette death around April.

  21. Re: lack of diversity --> Absurdity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so you are saying that you don't have a problem with there being more than one notepad clone, just that you don't know how to properly remove the nine you don't use?

  22. I have been running KDE for a month straight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No memory leaks...

  23. Re:Both bloated - Use neither by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Really? KDE runs fine on my P75/40meg system.
    Gnome/icewm runs fine as well. I haven't really had any RAM shortage problems and seem to have plenty of horsepower as long as I stay away from Enlightenment.

  24. Check out the QT html tutorials by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are really excellent. After that go to developer.kde.org.

  25. What the hell is a blunt? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You all are stupid.

  26. I use KDE on a P133/32M by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No problems. Not as fast as a console but not slower than windows either.

  27. Re:DUH! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    KDE sux! GNOME rules!

    'nuff said.

  28. Because I don't know what a blunt is??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Probably pot or something. That wouldn't suprise me at all.

    1. Re:Because I don't know what a blunt is??? by ArIck · · Score: 1

      Ok, well, it's off-topic, but maybe it'll stop someone from becoming a crack addict:

      Chronic is not just another name for "marijahoonie". Chronic is marijuana laced with crack (at least, I think so. Maybe it's other things). Not good.

    2. Re:Because I don't know what a blunt is??? by curiousgeorge · · Score: 1

      A blunt is a cigar wrapper filled with marijahoonie aka chronic, dojah, weed,pot....

      --
      !p00p
  29. blah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i believe that it was rasterman who said that he planed on building E it's own desktop environment instead of using gnome. i await the day. both kde and gnome have crippling faults, and E is no doubt the most attractive window manager. i anticipate the day when i can use E independantly from gnome.

  30. X allocates pixmaps, not the client by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As well as several other resources. That is why if the client exits without freeing them they are still in memory.

    1. Re:X allocates pixmaps, not the client by code4444 · · Score: 1

      Then X should detect when the client terminates, and free any resources allocated on behalf of the client. If resources are shared among clients, proper reference counting should take care of that.

      Applications are allowed to be buggy. Services like X should, like the kernel, be able to deal with buggy apps because if they don't they'll never be stable themselves.

      If there are fundamental problems why X can't clean up after an application that simply means it's protocols are fundamentally broken and should be fixed.

      GUI toolkits etc. should in a similar way correct for errors made by an application running on top of it. Although applications should behave properly the reality is that it is often pretty hard to make a complex appliation behave properly under all circumstances, and making sure things get fixed when a broken application exits does wonders for stability.

      You have no right to demand perfection from your clients unless you're the soup nazi.

  31. Re:Both bloated - Use neither by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess that it all depends on your definition of speed. KDE/Gnome both too slow for my tastes. And, like I said before, there are _no stable_ applications that I use that require either of them, so why saddle myself with a boated desktop just because it happens to be KDE/Gnome.

  32. KDE is stable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have not had a crash since 1.0...

    1. Re:KDE is stable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Errr, wasn't saying that KDE/Gnome were unstable, only stating that the _Applications_ (Korganizer, Gnome Calendar, gFTP, etc) provided with them weren't of the _stable_ quality that I am used to.

    2. Re:KDE is stable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your user info points to a url containing this information:

      D$:template("C:\Program Files\MVAPPS\websites\public_html\mvtemp\Normal.wb t","372fa7bc","0") -->

      Don't look like no unix path to me d00d !
      Looks like you da F***k'n Windoze d00d crashing the Linux party.

    3. Re:KDE is stable by gavinhall · · Score: 1

      Posted by stodge:

      I've had several crashes. Mostly due to kfm collapsing in a heap

  33. Re:Same is true for *WINDOWS*. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I appreciate the fact that the Kernel remains inviolate, but, from the point of view of joe bloggs pc user, restarting X is just slightly lower than rebooting Windows as measured on the PITA scale. If he was editing in StarOffice, the unsaved changes are now lost, just as surely as the would be if Wurd crashed his Windows system.

    Linux Gui development is coming along, but it has quite a long way to go to feel as easy and reassuring as W98 or Mac OS 8.5 to typical users. The most basic functionality is mostly there, but system and services configuration? Stone Age(from J.Bloggs' point of view and requirements.)

    A killer app, or two, not available on Windows 98, a proven, huge advantage versus 98 in resistance to filesystem/data corruption, a proven, huge advantage in filesystem access over time and as the partition fills up --these would be compelling arguments for Linux over Windows 98 in Windows 98's proper market segment. They would have to proven, large, and hammered on relentlessly in the popular press with no convincing counter from MS that fixes are coming.

  34. Re:KDE/GNOME by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think that another factor is the fact that most 'office apps' are written in an extremely un-Unixy fashion, so either developers have to swallow their aesthetic sense or come up with a new way of doing things. The first decreases the number of potential contributors (who wants to write nasty code?), while the second takes time (luckily, free software doesn't have a deadline :-) -- I'm not sure if anyone's working on the second angle, but I believe it has happened, although I can't think of any examples offhand. So I could be totally wrong :-) )

    Daniel

  35. Agreed. I've tried them all and: E R U L Z /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    /.

  36. Re:Watch yourself there buddy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not a matter of political correctness. It's a matter of technical correctness. Gnome and KDE don't manage windows, therefor they are not window managers.

  37. point and click email program? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    AArthur sez Linux still needs:

    >1) A good point an click e-mail program >(preferably supporting HTML) This is still >lacking! Maybe Netscape 5.0 will give us that.

    Ever heard of netscape communicator? it ships with most Linux distros. (I switched over to using netscape mail - the recent versions are really very nice and functional)

    >2) A simple, easy to use web browser. Netscape >5.0, based on Mozilla could be great!

    hmmm - again, this sounds like netscape communicator - perhaps you've heard of it?

    It ships with most Linux distros...

    1. Re:point and click email program? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >1) A good point an click e-mail program >(preferably supporting HTML) This is still >lacking! Maybe Netscape 5.0 will give us that.

      Ever heard of netscape communicator?

      NS mail is functional, and relatively easy to use, but it is not Eudora.

    2. Re:point and click email program? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      xfmail does run under RH6. After installing the required libs it compiled without any problems. Still, you don't want your mom to compile a program ;-)

      But don't forget, that consistent L&F is important. Windows and Mac are better in that respect.

      Let's see what happens when the PnP patches have been included in the kernel, drivers support the PnP kernel, XFree 4 is out, and Gnome/KDE have matured more. Although I don't believe that Linux will kill neither Windows nor Microsoft, it is good competition. We can all learn from each other.

    3. Re:point and click email program? by Brian+Knotts · · Score: 1
      No longer being supported? I don't think that's the case. AFAIK, it's still being worked on. And I've got it running on a RedHat 6.0 box, so I'm fairly certain it works OK. I compiled it from source, though; perhaps there is an XFMail rpm out there that doesn't work right?

      XFMail is a very nice mail program; it supports IMAP, POP and local mail spools, and does all the stuff that Netscape Mail doesn't do (like "Include File"). I don't know how Gennady Sorokopud would feel about it, but I'd love to see XFMail ported to KDE and/or GNOME. Unfortunately, that's a bit beyond my capabilities at this point. I don't know how difficult it would be, because I'm not sure how hard it is to port from xforms to another widget set.

      xforms, for those who don't know, is a freely-available, but binary-only (the authors say they will open source ver. 1.0, but not under the GPL), widget set, that is considered by many to be the ugliest widget set on the face of the earth. I won't disagree very strongly on this point... Those that use it, swear by it, though, saying that it makes building GUI programs quite easy.

      --

    4. Re:point and click email program? by Brian+Knotts · · Score: 1
      I stand corrected. Yes, after looking further at the site, and perusing DejaNews, it does appear that Mr. Sorokopud has dropped off the face of the earth, unfortunately. The last thing I saw from him was from nearly a year ago. Too bad...he really seems to be a good programmer.

      Anyhow, I had no trouble building XFMail that I recall. I did not use the xforms rpm, though...just the regular tarball.

      Maybe try that, if you were using the xforms rpm.

      --

    5. Re:point and click email program? by Brian+Knotts · · Score: 1

      No. Just another American, I'm afraid.

      --

    6. Re:point and click email program? by skribe · · Score: 1

      >NS mail is functional, and relatively easy to use, but it is not Eudora.

      I found xfmail better than Eudora. Unfortunately it is no longer being supported and doesn't run under RH6. It also (unfortunately) uses xforms, which is likely to annoy the purists. But it has all the functionality of Eudora Pro plus a better configuration interface. YMMV.

      skribe

      --
      Blog
    7. Re:point and click email program? by skribe · · Score: 1

      The web page hasn't been updated for more than a year, bug reports bounce, and, according to a friend, the mailing list has been very quiet. I think it's a fair guess that it's no longer being actively been worked on. I'd love to hear differently.

      How'd you get it compiled? I tried and it kept bugging out on the (I presume) new dbm.

      If anyone wants to arrange an rpm I know quite a few folks who have been posting on usenet asking for help who would be most appreciative.

      Oh yeah, I would too ;).

      skribe

      --
      Blog
    8. Re:point and click email program? by skribe · · Score: 1

      You wouldn't be a fellow aussie would ya? =)

      skribe

      --
      Blog
  38. because yr dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    apps will compete/steal ideas from each other and evolve a best of breed. get with the program.

  39. what the Crap Nebula are you talking about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    go back to 6th grade and retake grammar.

  40. mayoral issues by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i are college student. duh.

    1. Re:mayoral issues by carl_f · · Score: 1

      haha rofl
      Couldn't have said it better. wtf was he going on about ?
      ---------------
      me want more pinguins :)

  41. Information? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not much information here...With the merger, whose name will the project retain? What widget set will they use? How will they reconcile the difference between C++ and C?

    I think I want some more information before I take this as truth.

    1. Re:Information? by J.+J.+Ramsey · · Score: 1

      No one said that KDE and GNOME were planning a merger. What the KDE and GNOME developers are trying to do is have it so that KDE apps and GNOME apps can interoperate with each other.

  42. diald-monitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One of diald's options is to open an output fifo to which it will write an ongoing stream of state-change information, including when the link goes up/down.

    Write one program to consume this stream of information and maintain the interesting bits in a shared memory area.

    Write a second program which can be used to query the shared memory maintained by the first program.

  43. Let them bicker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What does your NT 2000 box have to do with anything? And why is bickering between KDE and GNOME the last thing Linux needs? I'm sure that there are probably some things that KDE does a lot better than GNOME. Likewise, I'm sure that there are some things that GNOME does that KDE doesn't do. I would rather them push each other to find the best solutions than just simply accept one because it's expedient.

    The deal with Free Software, in case you guys haven't figured it out yet, is that it takes time for these projects to evolve. From a competing with Windows perspective, it might actually make sense to sit down and roadmap a plan for getting our desktop in shape before the roll out of the W2K bug, but from the perspective of making a killer desktops for us users, this sort of attitude only hinders the development of these projects.

    Look at Mozilla. As far as I'm concearned, the project (as a whole ... everything about it) is about a year old, and it's still far from completion. Am I complaining? Absolutely not. Not at all. I'm willing to wait for it, because I believe that it's going to be a killer application. I would rather wait and have a great browser, than to have a mediocre one pushed out the door.

    Same thing with Linux. Same thing with GNOME. Same thing with KDE. Same thing with Enlightenment. Same thing with the GIMP. I use Linux. I want it to be good. As far as I'm concearned, the notion of competing with Windows is silly because, from my own selfish perspective, Linux has already won. And, if Linux is going to achieve World Domination (TM), then let's do it by showing others that our way is simply better. It may take longer, but really, what's the rush? The World is going to be around for a long time -- domination doesn't have to be an overnight thing.

    Regards,
    Travis

  44. HELL YEAH! XTERM NOW! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    cmd ln all th way d00d

  45. You're lying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    KDE + X takes about 32MB of RAM. I don't see how applications running on top of that could run fast.

  46. What the hell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Chill, what did this guy do to you?

    Maybe you haven't heard, but this is a hacker's OS. If you can't handle it, and I can't imagine you getting much help with your attitude, why don't you get yourself something that you can manage? Like a PlayStation or something.


    John Waalkes
    jwaalkes@edge.net

  47. Re:Same is true for *WINDOWS*. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pretty much the same thing as restarting X like you said...

    Actually its nothing like restarting X windows.

    When Windows restarts with this method, it still shuts everything down and restarts everything again... it just doesn't force the BIOS to reboot.

    So you're still losing everything.

    But when you restart X windows in Linux, mail still flows in the meantime, all the other lovely stuff going on in daemon land that did *not* crash is still running, etc.

    Don't mix up technologies. Windows is nothing like Linux in the stability department. Nothing.

  48. X licence not GPL compatible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is simply untrue. It is often stated that the X license is compatible, but this is essentially because RMS has not objected against that.
    Your statement concerning more|less rights of the license is just a rule of thumb, not a legal term.

    * There is no such thing as sublicensing in international copyright law. Only the copyright _holder_ can change the license, and the Open Group won't do that.

    * The GPL demands (in the preamble) that there has to be a note in the code -placed there by the copyright _HOLDER_ that the GPL can be applied to this code. This is obviously not the case with X code.

    So, strictly speaking, the GPL is not compatible with the X license, unless you use the "system library exception" (which also makes Qt compatible) of the GPL.
    As this is a tricky situation, people have basically ignored this problem and focused on bashing TrollTech and KDE's use of Qt instead.

    Av.

    1. Re:X licence not GPL compatible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The preamble is not part of the license. And it's not even the preamble you're talking about, it's the "How to Apply these terms to your program" part, which makes no demands, but simply suggests how to do it.
      And furthermore, I don't think international copyright law says you can't change the license if the copyright holder has given you that right, though I'm in no way an expert.

    2. Re:X licence not GPL compatible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correction: It's not in the preamble, it's even in art. 0, which is part of the regular license text.

      Excerpt:

      0. This License applies to any program or other work which contains a notice placed by the copyright holder saying it may be distributed under the terms of this General Public License. The "Program", below, refers to any such program
      or work, and a "work based on the Program" means either the Program or any derivative work under copyright law: that is to say, a work containing the Program or a portion of it, either verbatim or with modifications and/or translated into another language. (Hereinafter, translation is included without limitation in the term "modification".) Each licensee is addressed as "you".


      Even if you write the code for yourself, you are never the copyright HOLDER of X code.

      In art. 2 you can find

      These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate works.
      But when you distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of
      this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it.


      That's the same situation than with Qt. If you consider it 'part of the program', you also have to do that with X. Then the above clause applies and you're in licensing trouble...

    3. Re:X licence not GPL compatible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The second part you quoted, clearly makes it compatible with the X license. Note that it DOES NOT require you to relicense the X code under the GPL. art.2 require you to cover the combined work based on the GPL'd program under the terms of the GPL.

      It explicitly state that when distributed as separate works, the terms in the GPL does not apply to the non-GPL'd parts.

      In other words the GPL's art. 2 says that if you want to do something to a combined work including GPL'd code, that isn't allowed according to the GPL, then you are breaking the terms of the license, and aren't allowed to use the GPL'd part. You may still rip out the non-GPL'd part, and do whatever their license allows with them.

      So there's no licensing trouble there. You aren't applying the GPL to non-GPL'd code by combining GPL code and non-GPL code. The requirement is only that you can't use GPL'd code in a combined work if you do things with the combined code that violate the GPL.

  49. Unfortunately it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're right when saying technical explanations are ok to justify different ways of doing things.
    But inthis case (and a couple of others) I got the impression that the technical arguments were *very* weak and the "what I do is always simply better" of Miguel very strong.

    Essentially Miguel is the main obstacle to cooperation, and this effort may likely fail due to his bickering.

  50. Edit startkde by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Comment out some of the services you don't need in the startkde script.
    Don't use background images etc.
    Sure you shouldn't start StarOffice, but it's good for small tasks. I tried it on an 32MB Vaio, and it works.(Addidional KDE progs don't eat a lot of additional RAM, as the libs are already loaded)

    But usually I prefer kfm+Window Maker if I need a faster setup.

    (BTW, the main culprit is not KDE, but X. I'm really looking forward to a more modular XFree 4)

  51. Re:Be nice. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No it *isn't* functionally equivalent, you just don't get it... he was saying that when you restart X, your machine is *STILL FUNCTIONING AS IT SHOULD*, albeit without a GUI. That is *not* the same as if Windows is being Shift-restarted, not even close.

  52. Bull, learn to compile buddy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    -fno-rtti, -fno-exceptions are your friends. And have you every heard of virtual memory (swap)?

  53. Re:Finnally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not true. Windows uses *much* more memory and therefore is slower than X on most pc's because
    swapping is forced early on. On a very fast machine with lots of memory Windows may run faster because graphics are 'closer" to the kernel but this means that when individual windows crash the whole system often crashes.

    For example, I often use Enlightenment with X with heavy graphical themes, 4 destops, each with a different background in 16 bpp with 9 panes each and start up with kfm and an rxvt. That's 36 windows sized screens, with the K file manager which also loads about half of the Kde libs with it. Total size of swap file, less than 2 megs. (I have 32 megs of ram and a cheap AGP video card). It flies with Enlightenment and most of Kde and other apps.

    Starting Windows with *NO* applications running and only one desktop my swap is over 10 megs, and keeps getting bigger. And I get the boring Windows look with it. Wait for Win 2K which will requre a 350 mhz box with at least 128 megs for decent performance.

    Of course X can be improved - an it will be improved and will evolve into something better. But is is inifinitely beter than the Windows desktop right now in most ways.

    Kde does not use a lot of memory. It is true that Kde apps, includin the file manager, don't give memory back to the system until they are closed, but Kde is working on allocating memory in chunks that can be deallocated while apps are still running. Netscapse does the same. These are not memory leaks, as the memory is freed when one closes the apps. (There may also be some leaks but this does not account for the way these applications use more and more memory the longer they run). Most Windows programs are the same way, or worse.

    I use Linux for its desktop. Not for a server.




  54. Re:Small stuff KDE Needs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some comments:

    Ad 2) KDE is currently working on that. Will be there in 2.0.
    If you ideas how multihead support should look like, please mail me.

    Ad 3) Will be there in 2.0

    Ad 4) If Sun helps a bit we might be able to add it.

    Ad 5) I am sure you can put an icon on kpanel which
    does the same.

    Hope this helps,

    Cheers,
    Waldo Bastian
    bastian@kde.org

  55. Hey, command-line dinosaur! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have you noticed that the X/WM/KDE/GNOME mammals are eating your eggs?

    Have a nice extinction. Or better yet, go run your precious obsolete command-line on a TRS-80 with CP/M, or worse yet, M$-DOS.

  56. this gets a "2"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Not trying to be harsh on Mr. Vaughn, but really, moderators, did you actually read his post? he meanders around and reveals that he owns fifteen computers (some of which are a type average pc users probably haven't heard of before). He works with computers as his livelihood (good for him) but all he really proves is that he cannot claim even faint acquaintance with the fear and confusion average users feel in the face of computers. This is not a rebuttal, it's confirmation of most of what I claimed above.

    GUI environments including details of configuration are necessary for average users, Jay. They just are. Wasteful? I'll grant this --for now. But even if in theory they weren't so necessary, the existence of two strong environments (Win & mac) on desktop personal computers means that in practice Linux must have the equal if it is to succeed at all in the desktop market.

    People aren't going to convert to text based configuration and operating systems that exclusively cling to it because a)they don't like it and b)they don't have to. Text based configuration isn't called "harder" because of some subjective state of preconditioning that we can ascribe to Win/Mac users and wish-away. (they'll get over it) It simply is harder. The reason behind "a) they don't like it" is the simple fact that text based confguration allows for an _infinite_ number of mistakes and misconfigurations. It is just too easy for the uninitiated to make tiny mistakes in text based setup. They're missing a colon in their otherwise flawless XYZ script so it fails. Ld config what the #%$*&^ is that? DefaultColorDepth not Defaultcolourdepth. And so on. Gui configuration at least apparently reduces the possible number of *%&^-ups to a definite range. There are only so many buttons and combinations, so eventually I'll get it sez Mr. Bloggs .

    The vast majority want their computers to just run apps without fuss and let them play with _relatively limited_ customization of the desktop. hence preloads, Windows, and GUI configuration. They are happy in what many here would call the wading pool of computing. But aren't they perfectly within their rights to want to use their computers this way without investing what would be a great amount of mental effort to learn the Unix way? Remember, most people who work with computers are actually doing tasks that can be accomplished with more 'primitive' tools. They want their computers to work the same way, just faster. I never needed to RTFM on my typewriter to use it. They also have alot going on in their lives and workday; requiring them to wrap their busy little heads around the intricasies of Unix defeats the utility of the PC (make it faster) for them and is not going to be a very successful strategy for widespread Linux adoption.

    So what's wasteful, then? Writing GUI based configuration dialogs that people will use only rarely, or writing an OS that people will frequently remove from their hard drives because they cannot get over the learning curve of service configuration?

    1. Re:this gets a "2"? by torpor · · Score: 1

      He works with computers as his livelihood (good for him) but all he really proves is that he cannot claim even faint acquaintance with the fear and confusion average users feel in the face of computers.

      I didn't set out to prove that I have faint acquaintance with the fear and confusion average users feel so you'll have to excuse that shortcoming in my earlier post, though I can certainly back up the argument that I *am* familiar with this phenomenon if needed...

      I write music software for a living. The average electronic musician is a fairly savvy type, and I know that there are definitely reasons why musicians prefer Macs over PC's.

      That's not my point, however.

      My point is: People too easily *blame* computers rather actually take the steps to adjust *themselves* as needed in order to overcome the difficulties that they might encounter. To me, and many other 'techno geeks', this is makes the difference between someone who knows how to use a computer, and someone who doesn't - *not* some 'usability study' or 'focus group' that is supposed to make your AOL experience shinier and happier.


      GUI environments including details of configuration are necessary for average users, Jay.

      Are they? Really? Does a network setup dialog *have* to be a GUI in order for it to get its job done, or can it just be well laid out text, with good introductory text on what is occurring before and after, that guides the user through doing something they'll probably (on average) only ever do maybe 2 or 3 times for the lifetime of that computer?

      They just are. Wasteful? I'll grant this --for now.

      For now, meaning until we have terrabyte-level data storage for cheap, in which case multi-gigabyte dialog box-rendering code will not be considered as wasteful ... :)

      But even if in theory they weren't so necessary, the existence of two strong environments (Win & mac) on desktop personal computers means that in practice Linux must have the equal if it is to succeed at all in the desktop market.

      Not necessarily. A GUI configuration environment exists only to serve one purpose - to interact with the person using the computer and present them with information on terms they are comfortable with.

      A text mode Linux script could quite happily compete against Windows' "Network Control Panel" if the help text surrounding it were a *lot* more useful, friendly, descriptive, and resulted in the end user having a *much* better understanding of the process being performed.

      Graphical design is no replacement for competent literacy, either in the help-file author/programmer or the end user.

      People aren't going to convert to text based configuration and operating systems that exclusively cling to it because a)they don't like it and b)they don't have to.

      Who says they don't like it? Millions of Linux users can't be wrong, the majority of them are used to using text based config tools... This is just hearsay.

      Most people like it when the computer does what they think it is going to do, and they don't like it when the computer does something that wasn't predictable in the eyes of the user. GUI's just serve to buffer the 'experiencing' of this phenomenon in a visually appealing manner.

      Text based configuration isn't called "harder" because of some subjective state of preconditioning that we can ascribe to Win/Mac users and wish-away.

      I would say that its considered harder because peoples general perception is that screens of text represent study/schooling, and that is usually associated with a large deal of mental effort, often under 'duress' (i.e. school exams, homework, getting the best 'grade', etc).

      Whereas GUI's represent more of a 'video game' sort of perspective.

      My point is that this perception of text by average users is inaccurate, as automatic as it may be. If people were generally taught to read for the sake of reading, and not in order to get 'good grades' or experience the duress of modern educational methods, then a text mode configuration tool would probably not be viewed with as much disdain.

      Perhaps this explains why Linux and other text-ish operating systems are more widely used and more prevalent in the realm of formal education - since most students are already in positions where 'text' and the 'study of letters' is an ability they are already fully exercising in other aspects of their lives, such as college.

      (they'll get over it) It simply is harder.

      Define 'harder'. And give an argument for how you came to that conclusion...

      The reason behind "a) they don't like it" is the simple fact that text based confguration allows for an _infinite_ number of mistakes and misconfigurations.

      Does it really? I don't think the mode of operation of the USER INTERFACE has anything to do with whether or not infinite numbers of mistakes are possible. I would argue that its the 'smartness' of the application itself that allows this to occur - if something is wrongly entered in a text mode method of configuration, the program should be able to inform the user accordingly.

      Let me give you an example: /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts contains a few text files full of details about network configuration. ifconfig is run on the contents of these files, so they have to be fairly correct.

      If something is incorrectly entered, ifconfig usually complains about it by printf'ing to stdout. What if there were a 'help daemon' that ran on the machine to intercept these messages, interpret them according to a database of information, and send e-mail to the user giving them full details of what is wrong?

      So what's wasteful, then? Writing GUI based configuration dialogs that people will use only rarely, or writing an OS that people will frequently remove from their hard drives because they cannot get over the learning curve of service configuration?

      Whats wasteful to me is 'not writing adequate documentation that can be read by multiple levels of literate society' ... GUI's and text config arguments are not really my point.

      My point is mostly that people just need to be given better *mental* tools for them to use in overcoming computer-related difficulty, and that most of the modern pop-OS GUI's do not encourage the fostering of those *mental* tools, whereas Linux does, rightly or wrongly so.

      In fact, I would argue that pop-OS's like MacOS and Windows encourage entrophy of the mental accumen required to be computer-competent, and therefore have a destructive effect on the end users' computer competency, from a pure mental perspective.

      I'm not saying Linux is perfect in this regard, I'm just pointing out that it does encourage computer competency in many ways, and that knowing this difference, us, as members of the Linux/Slashdot community, should use this knowledge to further enhance Linux in the future, either by design of cool/interesting/useful Window managers, better admin scripts, etc.

      --
      ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
  57. KDE/Gnome are not window managers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Talk to me when E gets it's own office suite :P

  58. Re:Nothing wrong with the Trash-80 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Remember who wrote Extended Color Basic: Microsoft! It was the language that evolved into Basic-A/GW-Basic when the IBM-PC came out.

    Of course, this was back in the dark ages (early '80s), when Microsoft actually produced quality products and Bill Gates was "merely" a millionaire.

    A command-line interface is good for some things, especially in programming, but for the average person, the CLI has been dead since 1992, when Win3.1 came out. The introduction of the WWW in '94-'95 was the final nail in the CLI coffin. After all, how many people use Lynx? Not many in comparison with Internet Exploiter or Nutscrape.

  59. Re:The important thing here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You are absolutely correct here -- this is the most critical piece of the whole desktop environent. Which widget set is used basically doesn't matter at all in comparison to the object model. If the Gnome and KDE object models don't cleanly interoperate, then each project will only be about a quarter as useful as they could be, since network effects absolutely dominate when you can plug lots of small components together.

    For those not hip to what component models can buy you, imagine that at the command line you had two different, incompatible piping mechanisms. If ps used one and grep each used a different piping mechanism, you wouldn't be able to do things like "ps au | grep '(dns helper)'"; basically it would make scripting much harder.

    This is what we will face on the desktop if KOM and Baboon don't learn to talk to each other. Without it, the desktop environment will be pretty but basically useless, because you won't be able to script common tasks, you won't be able to take pieces of different apps to do things the way *you* want, and rapid prototyping becomes hell.

  60. Both bloated - Use neither by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Both KDE and Gnome make my puny little P200/64MB system screetch to a halt. I use neither, and do not foresee the need to anytime in the near future. Neither one offers anything at the _current_ date and time other than fancy widgets to play with on the desktop, no applications that are _stable_ and can be used for _real_ work. I would rather save what ram I have to applications to work with, not fancy widgets on the desktop.

    1. Re:Both bloated - Use neither by Stinking+Pig · · Score: 1

      They wouldn't seem "fast enough" after you tried XFce3 -- I like GNOME well enough to overlook its unfortunate number of core dumps, but I use XFCE when I want to get something done.

      http://www.xfce.org

      --
      "Nothing was broken, and it's been fixed." -- Jon Carroll
  61. Re:KDE/GNOME by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    please dont make jokes on slashdot threads, this is slashdot..not laughdot.

  62. Re:Finally by whoop · · Score: 1

    I too have a Matrox card and use KDE (v1.1.1). I have no troubles with it at all. I have left a single X/KDE session running for over a month with no problems. Currently X is at just under 20mb, but with 128mb ram I don't really mind that amount.

    Where I lose memory is Netscape (recently hit 80MB after about 3 days), but it's no trouble shutting it down when I close my Internet connection or when I'm done with it.

    Since KDE isn't any one program, what programs were up to 128MB? Is that with counting the shared memories?

  63. Re: lack of diversity --> Absurdity by whoop · · Score: 1

    Why should he have to delete them? The developers of all those notepads should be responsible for that. Yeah.

    In all seriousness, I agree with others who've stated how these programs are great learning tools for a language/toolkit. I use vi for most things, but when it came to seeing just how to implement a menu or toolbar in Qt/KDE, I broke open the source to kedit and voila; let the learning begin.

  64. Re:Wasn't this resolved? by whoop · · Score: 1

    There is still a sufficiently large crowd that does not want any software to be under anything but L/GPL licenses. It's tough to imagine, but there are people more rogue than RMS. :)

  65. KDE & GNOME Cooperate... by zztzed · · Score: 2

    ...Catastropic Explosion Follows. Film at 11.

  66. Same is true for *WINDOWS*. by torpor · · Score: 1

    I sit here reading slashdot on a Windows98 PC which I just rebooted 10 minutes ago due to there being insufficient USER resources to deal with the 15 browser windows, the email client, the irc client, the development environment and the task scheduler, all of which I had running at the same time, and in *spite* of the fact that I have 128 Megs of RAM in this box.

    And yet, when I closed all of those applications, I still couldn't start any others up due to an error from Windows itself "Insufficient memory to start application".

    Windows is a far worse culprit than Linux in this regard. Hardcoded User Resource limitations? Sheesh.

    With Linux, I could've just restarted X and still had my scheduler, email program, development environment still in good shape, but with Windows I've had to reboot it fully in order to get it back in working order.

    --
    ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
    1. Re:Same is true for *WINDOWS*. by torpor · · Score: 2

      ... from the point of view of joe bloggs pc user...

      This point of view is a result of that persons involvement with computers over time, their experience. The 'position in PITA scale' as measured by joe bloggs pc user is only relevant when they don't know whats going on... once a user is savvy enough (because no matter how you look at it, becoming savvy is definitely better than just being glib about computer usage) they will become to appreciate the true benefits of this separation from kernel and user interface, and will adopt an operating basis accordingly.

      Most people are confused by Windows when they first start using it because they don't know whats going on. As they learn what goes on behind the scenes, they become better and better at using it... the same formula holds true for Linux.

      ...but system and services configuration? Stone Age(from J.Bloggs' point of view and requirements.)

      Again, this is subjective based on J.Bloggs' experiences as he learns to use his computer. Sure, if he just came from a Mac and now has to learn how to edit a text file, he's more than likely not going to want to do this because he is taught that 'learning how to do something new in life' is hard work, and so will therefore find fault with the computer rather than with his own inhibitions towards discovery.

      And excuses such as "but I am too busy, I don't have time to learn something" may work to counter my argument that people should just become more literate, but as an argument it doesn't serve to solve the fundamental problem, which is that "learning something new" is misperceived as a slow and painful process.

      Actually, it gets faster and easier the more you do it, and most professional computer users take great pride in their ability to hone their causative discovery skills with regards to technology.

      I think that this is the fundamental reason behind the Linux movement, personally: people enjoy the process of refining their skill sets that comes from having access to Linux, its tools, and its source code. It builds character. (heh heh!)

      Whereas Windows and other Microsoft products are really more specifically geared towards the user *not* having to learn anything, and thus *not* improving their cognitive skills, and to many people this is limiting, and in some cases offensive.

      Additionally I would argue that system/services configuration does not *NEED* a large deal of sophisticated GUI - after all, it should be something that only ever happens once.

      I have 15 computers in my posession, and I've done major configuration to each one of them maybe 2 or 3 times in the last 5 years that I've had them - everything ranging from multiple windows machines, 5 linux servers, a couple of SGI workstations, etc. Sure, it was nice to have a GUI, but that GUI is just sitting there wasting space now that I've gotten everything working fine...

      So I don't agree that these are strong points in Windows' favour, at least not in the context of this discussion...

      --
      ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
    2. Re:Same is true for *WINDOWS*. by rrogers · · Score: 1

      With Linux, I could've just restarted X and still had my scheduler, email program, development environment still in good shape, but with Windows I've had to reboot it fully in order to get it back in working order.

      Ok, this isn't generally a place for "Windows tips and tricks", but I learned a really nice one the other day to restart windows quickly. After clicking on Start=>Shutdown and selecting "Restart the computer" Hold down the shift key and press enter. That will restart windows without rebooting the computer. (Pretty much the same thing as restarting X like you said.) Unfortunately it doesn't work with NT.

    3. Re:Same is true for *WINDOWS*. by rrogers · · Score: 1

      Maybe I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that when you did this it didn't kill everything, just restarted the GUI (and killed everything that was running in it). I don't remember seeing it reprocess the autoexec.bat file. If I am running Windows 95 I can still have programs in my autoexec.bat which run on the command line which start before the GUI does. Like I said, maybe I'm wrong, but I didn't think it killed these (just like it wouldn't kill fetchmail and sendmail and other daemons or whatever you had running.)

      I completely agree with you that Windows is nothing like Linux in the stability department, but some of us are forced to use it. I was just trying to reply to someone's comment about being forced to reboot to free up memory and I was trying to give him a hint that would save him time.

  67. Just goes to show you, Linux gives you more choice by torpor · · Score: 1

    For some, its the same. For others, its not.

    In Windows land, you have no choice. Totalitarian technology!

    End of discussion.

    --
    ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
  68. Re:KDE/GNOME by DrSpoo · · Score: 2

    Small apps such as text editors and paint programs tend to be very good examples when it comes to learning a new programming language like GTK or QT. Since KDE/GNOME are open source, anyone just starting out can peek in at the source to see how things are done. I know I have personally done this with many of the smaller KDE apps, and now I have a much greater understanding on how things are supposed to work. From this standpoint, it's definately a benefit in my opinion.

    --
    Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
  69. Oh my golly! by shaldannon · · Score: 2

    **sarcasm**

    What are we gonna do?? We can't bash each other any more about KDE and gnome cause the big shots from each camp are getting friendly!! The world is ending!! We must find a new enemy within the Linux camp to attack!!

    **end sarcasm**

    Why is there this obsession with identifying "ingroups" and "outgroups"? Why not all share and be friendly? Why not give Windows its occasional due (it still is generally a better gaming platform, and is the source of inspiration for a lot of Linux development)? As people here have noted, slahdotters tend to get overly religious about [window mangers/desktop environments/word processors/distributions/etc.]. There's such a thing as using what works for you and letting everyone else do what they like (as long as they're doing the same....after all, standing there getting flamed for being moderate isn't right).


    Who am I?
    Why am here?
    Where is the chocolate?

    --


    What is your Slash Rating?
  70. Re:My Netscape Communicator is leaking by Brian+Knotts · · Score: 1
    Strange. Netscape leaks memory like a sieve, sure. But I can recover from that by just killing it.

    I agree that as Mozilla gets closer, my anticipation grows. I've used M7, and they're definitely making progress.

    --

  71. Re:Interesting news... by Suydam · · Score: 1
    Not to nitpick, but neither KDE or GNOME are really windowmanagers.

    They each come with a WM, but you're over simplifying the significance of this announcement.

    --


    Werd.
  72. Re:Interesting news... by Suydam · · Score: 1
    you're being serious? or sarcastic?

    I'm not really sure. If you're being serious, then congrats on finding IceWM...it's nice. if you're being sarcastic, then I might ask "why?"

    --


    Werd.
  73. Re:KDE/GNOME by McKing · · Score: 1

    HA HA HA!!!!

    that was so funny, ....laughdot :)

    --
    If only "common" sense was actually that common...
  74. Re:DUH! -- BIGIT by Danse · · Score: 1

    I think I'll make the safe assumption that that was a joke. Some people are a bit too sensitive and/or have rather weak sense of humor...

    --
    It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
  75. Re: Remove moc? I don't think so. by Chip+Salzenberg · · Score: 1
    That can't be right ... moc is a vital part of the Qt architecture. So as long as KDE is built on Qt, I don't see how you can get away from moc.

    Unless, of course, Qt 2.0 is very different from Qt 1.x in this aspect....

  76. About time by Iggy · · Score: 1

    The subject says it all.

    Lets face it. By combning the abilites of the GNOME and KDE folks we are starting to group together a very serious group of talented programmers without wasting time and effort trying to better the opposition.

    It's this kind of annoucement that will really start the linux/*NIX domination of the market.


    All credit is due to those people who can see past the differences and who work towards a common goal.

    Iggy

  77. This is what we need to see more of... by MazTaim · · Score: 3

    Part of the problem that has haunted Open Source is the fact that there are many people willing to develop their own code because the code that they have been using "doesn't quite cut it." Don't get me wrong, that is also part of what makes Open Source so great. It can also be it's downfall. GNOME and KDE being a potential example of this. Although both were designed as an X Environment, they have-for the most part-gone seperate ways in how each interacts with X.
    By meeting on common grounds on certain issues, they are giving your everyday user (such as myself) better choices without much hassle.

    Now keep in mind, these are my opinions...I am not all knowing, and not a very good speller. Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

    1. Re:This is what we need to see more of... by Edward+Carter · · Score: 1

      The fact that kde and gnome have agreed on a drag 'n' drop protocol is old news. Look up something called "xdnd."

    2. Re:This is what we need to see more of... by Pont · · Score: 1

      Does dragging a file from the gnome file manager into a KDE app's file chooser box work (or vice versa)? Can you swallow a Gnome app on the KDE panel or vv.? Can you drag and drop text between a Gnome and KDE app?

      I think that is what the previous poster was reffering to, not that you can't run KDE apps under Gnome and vv.

  78. Re:Perhaps Panel Compatibility Later On? by Thomas+Charron · · Score: 1

    This would be SO nice.. It would extend the applet library for BOTh systems drastically..

    I can only hope it happens,..

    --
    -- I'm the root of all that's evil, but you can call me cookie..
  79. Re:Interesting news... by riffraff_69 · · Score: 1

    They each come with a WM, but you're over simplifying the significance of this announcement.

    Really? Gnome comes with a WM? I didn't know that. I've been using Gnome since 0.40 (or soemwhere around there) and I never knew it came with a wm. I've been using icewm with it. So what's the wm Gnome comes with?... I'd like to try it out.

  80. This is a Good Thing(tm) by Outlyer · · Score: 2

    Suffice to say, this benefits everyone. Personally, I run GNOME for the look and feel, and the interface, but there are some nice KDE applications. The fact that they run is nice enough :) Interoperability is the holy grail because it stifles the argument about incompatible development. You don't like Gnumeric? Use KSpread! You don't want the kde file manager? Use gmc. It works out beautifully. With theming support for KDE, even the widgets will (in theory) look similar, we'll be able to draw upon the efforts of both KDE and GNOME developers and have a unified desktop.

    Anyone who says this is a waste of time, is severely lacking in the 'big picture' department.

    --
    ----------------- "I have a bone to pick, and a few to break." - Refused -------------------
    1. Re:This is a Good Thing(tm) by AArthur · · Score: 1

      I feel the same way. I use GNOME + E for my main desktop (at least for now), and I use KPPP and a few other KDE apps.

      People need choice. Not everybody wants a KDE or a GNOME feature, they should be able to use the other desktop's feature (or none). Desktops should be so intergrated that this is easy.

      When I first moved to GNOME, I used the KDE File Manger, since GNOME had nothing close at the time (gmc was a toy then).

      I am glad to see this all working out. Please don't bash a certain desktop enviroment, since someday you'll be using it.

      True developers don't bitch about desktop enviroment choices.

  81. FINALLY! by Millennium · · Score: 2

    This is a step in the right direction (a common windowmanager support API would be nice also).

    It's not going the whole way, but that's to be expected; these things are usually taken in small steps. It's the sort of thing which should be encouraged; the more interoperable these DE's become the better for everyone.

  82. Compatibility == Good imho by Tigger4 · · Score: 1

    I'm a gnome user myself, but I have a few KDE apps that I like to use also. I think it would be great if they could share themability and whatnot. It would allow the developer to use which desktop environment he/she wants, and the user to integrate the application with his/her interface.

    Mike

    --
    Tigger's like to read /. too!
  83. Re:Interesting news... by osu-neko · · Score: 1
    I'm glad to know you've been using Gnome since 0.40, but have you bothered to update to a newer version recently? Gnome comes with Enlightenment and has for some time. Granted, you do not need to download and install it, but that doesn't alter the fact that Enlightenment is the WM Gnome comes with, if you follow the directions on their FTP site, which instruct you to download everything in the "Base" directory, which includes Englightenment. (Even if they didn't tell you to, the fact that Enlightenment is in the Base directory ought to be a clue...)

    I assume you're trying to be sarcastic. If it weren't for the fact that you're dead wrong, it might even have been funny...

    --

    --
    "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
  84. Re:his last name by Prothonotar · · Score: 1

    I believe it's Paddington. :)
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.

    --
    "Every man is a mob, a chain gang of idiots." - Jonathan Nolan, Memento Mori
  85. Re:DUH! -- BIGIT by Ponder · · Score: 1

    BIGOT - buy a dictionary.

    --
    -- Back to the shadows again...
  86. These aren't good reasons for a daemon by roystgnr · · Score: 2

    The reason not to use an environmental variable is that already-running apps are not notified.

    The reason not to use an environmental variable is that it's redundant information which could be obtained just as easily from ifconfig.

    Put CORBA support in your ifup/ifdown program, which will then (de)activate an interface, report that action to all the apps who want to know, and exit when they're done.

    It would be necessary to have this ifup/ifdown program the default way of handling network interfaces, but if you could get Gnome & KDE to agree on it the free Unix distributions will all fall over backwards to accomodate.

    There's the question of proprietary Unix support - but is this network monitoring daemon going to be able to do anything better than polling 'ifconfig' on them anyway?

    I think that criticizing this sort of stuff before it's built is really a bad idea.

    I think doing planning & design consideration before you start writing code is a good idea. You can hack an inefficient or bad implementation of a program at your leisure, but fixing an inefficiently or badly designed program is something to avoid if at all possible.

    If you don't like it, then don't use it or come up with something better. For the most part, though, these guys know full well what they're doing, as evidenced by the quality so far of GNOME and KDE both. Just kut them some gslack.

    You'll get no argument from me there. But keep in mind, one of the mixed blessings of Open Source development is the thousand back seat drivers waiting in the wings to point out segfaults, memory leaks, and even potential bad ideas. I think leaving a process sitting on it's ass 99% of the time to provide the functionality containable in a short shared library is a bad idea.

  87. They've got CORBA on the brain by roystgnr · · Score: 4

    Does someone want to explain to me exactly what advantages this "network connection daemon" will have over a few hundred shared library lines that call "route" (or play with /proc) and "ifup"?

    I've got enough sleeping processes taking up RAM on my system as it is.

  88. Re: Remove moc? I don't think so. by Kenelson · · Score: 1
    It certainly is not done yet, but it really isn't all that hard to do. The Qt signal/slot implementation can be replaced entirely with libsigc++. The whole point of libsigc++ is to provide a tool to build reusable libraries with. Libsigc++ is a complete superset of Qt signal system.

    Now how does this work... the old system would be removed from Qt and its replacement from Libsigc++ can be used in its place. Internally, this a bit of work depending on the number of close interactions within Qt with the signal system. It is certainly doable as a similar task is being done with Gtk-- right now to upgrade versions of signal system. This can be done to applications with a simple flex/bison program that converts the code once, rather that over and over again like MOC. They just toss out the source for MOC and use the translated source directly. Considering the code had to be preprocessor safe to start it is not a great task.

    Since libsigc++ is LGPL incorperating it in this fashion is not breaking any licences and Troll Tech is able to use the modified Qt both in the free and comercial versions. Of course, it can never be as closely incorperated as another GPL project can, but it is certainly workable. GPL/LGPL projects can just directly incorperate Libsigc++ into the code base if they want and build stronger interactions to their benifit. However, I feel that it is complete enough that most projects won't have to do that.

    Since some of Qt tied code is tied by the Qt types and signal system, replacing these with free pieces is of great benifit to the free software comunitee. You could then take a piece without having to keep it linking back to Qt. Reuse is our strength and libsigc++ was built to encourage that reuse by making library callbacks very easy to do. (Not that Qt under the new license is all that restrictive, but it is not directly GPL compatable which the new piece is.)

    This of course will have to wait til Qt 2.2 or something when the KDE developers have time to make the changes. It is not a feature of Qt 2.0, because libsigc++ was not even seperated from Gtk-- til after Qt 2.0 went to Beta! As fundemental as the signal/slot implementation is to Qt, to applications it was only just another API.

    Hope this clears things up a bit.

    --Karl

  89. Re:KDE/GNOME collaboration...or not? by Kenelson · · Score: 2
    The way I see it, this situation basically boils down to this--either a.) the two projects merge and we have a unified code-base, b.) the two projects do not merge, but cooperate closely with each other so that they are more or less completely compatible, or c.) they cooperate somewhat, but not very much(like now) and the two remain partially, but not wholly, compatible.

    I believe that (a) is strictly out. The projects are built on different philosophies on how everything should work. One wants C and other C++. One intends to be strictly LGPL while the other tends toward GPL. Both sides seem to want the other to give up their widget sets. Talking to both, I think hell will freeze over first. Unless some super kit comes allong that is far better than both and it equally usable for both C and C++, it is not going to happen.

    Therefore, it will always be (b) or (c). The best hope is that CORBA will saturate the 2 frameworks and thus the interoperablity comes down to the API which they are working on. This of course means more of (c) the most likely outcome. Since the underlying technology (different widgets sets, different framework libraries) is so different, they will most likely just share some compatablity between file formats and such. But at that level the user will always need both library sets installed for the user to run applications from both under one desktop.

    Of course, I don't really mind that solution as long as it doesn't bloat them both out as you mentioned. The simplest workable solution should be the one that they adopt. I feel a continued competition between the desktops is good to inspire inovation (unlike those who feel it a waste of effort.)

    --Karl

  90. Signal Systems by Kenelson · · Score: 5
    Asside from this development, there has also been some talk on irc between members of the KDE crew and myself on sharing the signal/slot implementation between Gtk-- and Qt. Although the meeting was slightly dampened by my over competive nature, it generally ended with a positive step towards working together. This would further interopablity between KDE and GNOME by allowing the KDE C++ code and C++ GNOME code to share library elements that do not depend on the widget sets.

    Sharing of signal/slot implementations would benifit KDE by removing the MOC preprocessor and improve the flexiblity of their signal/slots. GNOME will get the benifit that KDE libraries and applications will be less tied to Qt and thus more easily reused. Since libsigc++, the Gtk-- signal system, is a close translation of the capablities of gtk+ signal system, this should also reduce the burden of programmers trying to understand the two kits. For projects with multiple frontends, this would be a great help.

    Unfortunately, this development is not set to be planned until after the summer when the KDE people start a developers cut of Qt. Assuming that people are interested I can give some directions as to how the translation can be made, but I don't have time to work on it heavily myself. (Preliminary specifications have already been sent to Mosfet.) I can mail more info to other interested programmers.

    --Karl

  91. Re:Wasn't this resolved? by dvdeug · · Score: 1

    No, it wouldn't. See RMS's comment on Netscape Public License problems on www.gnu.org for a similar situation, where he points out that one of the problems (according to him) of NPL is that it's not GPL-compatible, despite the fact it's free.

  92. Re:Wasn't this resolved? by dvdeug · · Score: 1

    The X license is compatible. Basically, anything you can say is GPL by sublicensing (X, some BSD) or by changing the licence (LGPL) or because it is (Perl license, GPL & something else) is compatible.

  93. Re:KDE/GNOME by stevef · · Score: 1

    I think one of the reasons there are a lot of "simple" apps instead of one GOOD app is that simple apps are much easier to code either as a single developer or in a loosely structured open environment. That is a main reason that office apps are so far behind in Linux... anyone can write notepad, but it's much more difficult to write a quality word processor. Steve

  94. The Linux community is maturing. by LinuxGeek · · Score: 1

    I think that more than just a (some) killer app(s), many people have been waiting for more mature attitudes and perspectives from most or all of the leaders in the Linux community. This is a great sign and, to me anyway, just about guarantees that Linux will be appreciated and used more and more as a primary desktop platform.

    Now, back to Civ:CTP :)

    --

    Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
  95. Re:Perhaps Panel Compatibility Later On? by AArthur · · Score: 1

    That's great news!

    Compatibly is good for all GNOME and KDE app developers. It increases the potential user base, user choices and developer choices.

  96. Re:This is good and bad. by AArthur · · Score: 1

    Nobody is forcing you to use both. Just use the one that you want to use, based on the features it has (that appeal to you). Everybody has different needs, wants and preferences. ONE size does not fit all!

    The nice thing is if KDE and GNOME interact, you *can* use both together, although it will use slightly more resources.

    Competition is good. Monopoly on the desktop is bad.

  97. Re:That's great and all, but... by AArthur · · Score: 1

    I don't understand what you are mumbling about.

    E and Window Maker are both Window Mangers, and one has to run at a time.

    If you are suggesting intergrating the code bases into one source code, that would not make sense, since Window Maker aims to be something totally different then Enlightenment.

    If you are talking about GNOME compatiblity, both E and Window Maker work great with GNOME. Window Maker also works pretty good with KDE, although E could use some intergration work.

  98. Re:woah, woah... it is *NOT* as easy as Windows... by AArthur · · Score: 2

    I disagree.

    Most older people, who have never used a computer before, really don't care about messing with configuration that much.

    They really don't care about kernel version, or how much of a certain word the computer has.

    They want something that does their work reliabily, without crashing and quickly. They don't want to configure things (except maybe Desktop Pictures, or maybe even icons/widgits color).

    In my experience the vast amount of people want the following:

    1) A good point an click e-mail program (preferably supporting HTML) This is still lacking! Maybe Netscape 5.0 will give us that.

    2) A simple, easy to use web browser. Netscape 5.0, based on Mozilla could be great!

    3) Word Processor like Microsoft Word with spelling under lining features, and simple but functional formating controls (like Microsoft Works 1.0 for Macintosh). AbiWord could do great here (when it's ready)!

    4) Being able to print easily.

    5) One click access to all of these features, on the desktop.

    So little needs to be done to get this done. It can be done okay, today, but wait 6 months, and you'll find it is ready for the masses.

    Joe Blow could care less about source code, or enlightenment or configuring advanced settings.

    Leave them to the system adminstator. What?! Joe Blow is the system admin? Well, then we do need to intergrate GUI tools better.

    Linux today, has the technology today to be vastly point and click adminstation, but in my experience no distro does a good job at showing them.

    You would be hard pressed to find me a setting that you can not point and click on a Linux system (assuming you have the graphical tool installed.

    KDE and GNOME are great, appealing to their own groups of people. Now if they just work together better, that would be great!

    Simple things. You can do better!

    KEEP THE GREAT WORK UP GNOME AND KDE TEAMS!

  99. Re:KDE/GNOME by AArthur · · Score: 2

    Another reason why Office Apps are behind in Linux, is that Linux didn't become a platform to develop large flexable office Applications, until KDE/qt and GNOME/gtk+ were released.

    Yes, their was older toolkits, but many of them were limited, ugly or preformed horribly. (examples: Athena, Motif). Lesstif is a new thing, that finally allowed workable Motif apps to run on Linux for nothing.

    A good office program needs a good desktop enviroment behind it to work good, and compete modernly. APIs need to be in place from the desktop enviroment to work. That's what KDE and GNOME are all about. They provide APIs that make good office software possible.

    Office programs are quickly catching up, the speed of development in Linux is faster then most commerical development (what desktop enviroment has recieved a full featured desktop, a powerful imaging program and a office program in like 3 years?). Microsoft Windows didn't have a really good image editing program until like 1993 to 1994. Windows 3.1 was hardly a full featured intergrated desktop, it had many holes, and often required editing text files. DOS mode programs were the norm in the first few years. Windows 98 was the first version of Windows that fully intergrated the Internet into WIndows.

    The Mac OS didn't grow up over night either. Early versions of it were limited, you could run one program at the time, painting on a 9 inch screen was pretty limited, some of the first office choices sucked pretty bad (you want MacWrite or MacWrite with that machine?, MS Word for Macintosh was a distance awy).

    It takes time. But if history shows the progress of a rapidly growing OS, Linux will become full featured sometime from 2000 to 20001.

    Keep watching, developing, and enjoying!

  100. I screwed up. by navindra · · Score: 1

    I'm sorry, I screwed up!

    The network connection manager will do much more: like letting applications request a connection, bring down the connection, etc. It's exactly that, a network connection *manager*. Please read the list articles for more details.

  101. Yeah by navindra · · Score: 1

    This is all my fault for leaving the kde-devel summary to the last minute.

    The network connection manager is meant to do more than just trivially detect whether the line is up or down. It will allow apps to request that the line be brought up or down, and more... It may or may not be implemented with CORBA, but the goal is to make sure KDE and GNOME don't do this in incompatible ways.

    Maybe check out Bjoern's page: http://home.netsurf.de/bjoern .kahl/netmgr/index2.html and the list articles for all the proper details.

  102. Re:Finally by zifnab · · Score: 1

    That's like saying that there should be memory leaks in the kernel because apps forget to free() all of their memory. Everywhere else in Unix, once the process dies, all its resources are freed.


    But when a process allocates some *shared* memory, it won't be freed by the kernel once it has died. And there are sometimes leaks this way.

    seb.
    --
    --
    Memory fault -- brain fried
  103. Re: lack of diversity --> Absurdity by irongull · · Score: 1

    I extend your line of questioning to display it's absurdity
    And I question your extension of the line of questioning to display it's absurdity.
    - Why doesn't everyone focus on writing good apps for Windows instead of Linux?
    Because Windows sucks. Don't you read slashdot?
    - Why do companies waste time developing non-intel processors?
    Because they are heathen infidels.
    - Why do people around the world waste time learning/reading/writing/speaking non-english languages?
    That is a damn good question. I have often wondered that myself. It would make my life much easier.
    - Why do students waste time doing problems listed in their books instead of inventing new problems?
    Because the professors are too lazy to come up with interesting novel problems. They are far too busy psychologically abusing their graduate students.
    - Why do we need a dozen search engines?
    Because they all suck. In combination, they suck a little less.
    - Why do all these little countries need their own government?
    Again, that is a damn good question. We should just all get together and agree that our governements suck, then find one that sucks less than the others, and let them take over. Perhaps Canada. They seem to be doing fairly well. Or Holland.
    - Why do we need all these programming languages. Can't everyone use Java for everything?
    Err, don't you mean perl?

  104. Re:Perhaps Panel Compatibility Later On? by Kurt+Granroth · · Score: 2

    I'm told that this will happen. Matthias Ettrich (kwm author and KDE founder) is supposedly working with several sombodies at creating a standard "applet" protocol. When that happens, I'll have those mods in KBiff within a day or so.

    For the record, I was going to put direct GNOME panel support into kbiff but didn't for two reasons:

    1) I couldn't get the gnome system working until *very* recently
    2) As soon as I got it working, I heard of the common applet collaboration and decided not to waste my time on code that would be thrown away in a few months.

  105. Re:Dissapointed w/ GNOME Leadership by Kurt+Granroth · · Score: 2

    Frankly speaking, it doesn't matter. Certain individuals have made it clear in this thread and in many others that they have no intention of co-operating. Again, it doesn't matter.

    As you can see from this thread, there *are* developers from both sides that are more than willing to co-operate. That's what it takes -- people that will do the actual work. If there is a clear consensus that co-operation and shared protocols are a Good Thing *AND* there is code to back that up, then those who stand in the way will simply get overruled or swept aside.

    It's in the best interest of both users and developers from both sides to go this route. Recalcitrant individuals can do nothing more than slow the process down...

  106. Small stuff KDE Needs by scrytch · · Score: 2

    > KDE already works pretty good on lesser known *nixes, such as SC0, AIX, or *BSD.

    And *ahem* Solaris. It's picking up a bit of popularity here at Sun actually, but it's a long way off from replacing the well-entrenched CDE. Here's my immediate impresson of why:

    1. Inertia, retraining, ego. Things KDE can't do a whole lot about. Not a small item, and will be a major inhibiting factor even if KDE were superior in *every* respect.

    2. KDE does not support multiheaded displays. Many apps like kwm act strangely when started on a second display. Alt-F2 on any display still uses the first display.

    3. No IMAP support in kmail. kmail also doesn't perform any kind of locking as far as I can tell, and isn't mailx compliant. dtmail, the standard CDE mail program, which replaces mailtool (sadly) is klunky beyond belief but is reasonably powerful. IMAP is an absolute must. vcard and LDAP support will probably soon be requirements as well.

    4. A calendar that supports CDE's dtcal standard and takes attachments dragged out of kmail onto the calendar icon. Do one better than CDE by giving some actual feedback when it's dropped, and not just silently dropping appointments if the calendar isn't running (which amazingly, is what happens now)

    5. Preferred web browser support. Solaris 2.7 has a one-click web-browser icon on the panel (the funky looking globe clock). It will launch either netscape or hotjava, using the equivalent of netscape-wrapper for both, in that it will not launch new processes if one exists, just open new windows.

    Oh, and KDE compiles just fine with devpro, which is what cc is on my system.



    --
    I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
    1. Re:Small stuff KDE Needs by scrytch · · Score: 2

      The dtcal standard should be documented somewhere, since the calendar sync for pilotmgr will sync CDE calendars. Try looking there.

      --
      I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
  107. Re:KGNOME by scrytch · · Score: 2

    > (a) MS developed DOS ? IBM did and (regrettably) passed development over the MS in 88 or something.

    IBM, with all its expertise, somehow couldn't find anyone who knew anything about small-footprint operating systems at all, so they got Micro-Soft, a compiler vendor with no OS development experience at all to pick one out for them. MS picked a hacked-up piece of crap called QDOS, handed it over to IBM, with the stipulation that MS be allowed to develop their own version in the future. IBM agreed.

    Sad thing is, not much else would have run with any acceptable performance, given the corners cut on the hardware. But then it wouldn't have been affordable, Apple would have annihilated the PC makers, and it would be Steve Jobs in front of a judge now.

    --
    I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
  108. Re:See? We learn something everyday! by scrytch · · Score: 2

    No, you're just one of the annoying ones who pontificates upon this fact. Go back to your starbucks and microbrews, "drug-free" boy.

    --
    I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
  109. GPL misinterpretation, part MCXII by tolonuga · · Score: 2

    > hat the GPL cannot be used with any non-GPL libraries

    the exact sitation is : if you want to mix GPl with non-GPL:
    - the other licence must allow everything the GPL allowes
    - the other licence may only restrict stuff also restricted by the GPL. more exact: may not have clauses not found in the GPL.
    thus, it's possible to mix GPL'ed software with much other stuff. as long as at least as much is allowed, and not more is restricted.
    example licences, where this is true:
    LGPL, BSD, XFREE, Apache, Artistic

    examples of licences with additional clauses, but still free software: MPL and QPL

    please let the "GPL only with GPL" syndrom die.
    GPL with LGPL, GPL with BSD and such stuff is very common and a good counter example. or even better: read the licence. i always wonder how many people didn't ...

  110. woah, woah... it is *NOT* as easy as Windows... by 8Complex · · Score: 1

    Let me see if I can make this as unbiased as possible for I really *DO* like Linux...

    Windows applications are GUI. Period.
    Linux applications are half GUI, half Console, and half hidden configuration files.

    Windows sets up it's hardware with EASE.
    Linux drags it's ass and then you *STILL* have to be a genius to get PnP working right for just 3 cards.

    Windows is far ahead in the game and there are many more well-designed applications for doing what you want, so productivity and time it takes to get used to it are a lot better then Linux which...
    ...which has a million applications to do the same thing but 90% of them were designed for the console or by people that use the console a lot, so they are either very badly designed GUI's or need a *TON* of configuration.

    Windows is a pre-smoothed GUI so out of the box everything looks good (relatively speaking, that is).
    Linux on the other hand needs hours to get things working right, and that is IF you know what you are doing. I still to this day haven't figured out how to install and use another font in, say, the titlebars in E (other then installing a theme with it included). And truetype fonts? I still haven't seen them on my machine yet, still looks like hell.

    Now, back to my biased side here...

    Now I love Linux and I love to play with it and all but that is just it... play. I can't get anything done when it comes to work or anything else because Linux's GUI is so rough. Even working with Gnome & E, the applications are still tough to grasp. I have spent literally hours working at getting Linux usable for working and by that point, I don't want to work anymore, I want to go watch TV or go out or SOMETHING other then sitting in front of the computer. It's really frustrating.

    Now I saw a truely good idea in that recent install program by Caldera, and I don't see why people are knocking it because it'll make installation 10 times easier. Granted, Redhat's install is fairly easy, it still lacks details that I'd love to know. Like that question... "What services do you want running on startup?" How the hell should I know? I think I know what 2 of them are.. sendmail and I forget the other.

    Now, no offense or anything, but I put my money on the fact that if your mom got onto a Windows machine she'd start doing things faster almost instantly. She'd probably also catch onto the GUI a lot faster.

    8Complex

  111. Re:KDE Moving Towards Artistic License? by Alex+Zepeda · · Score: 1

    The daemon aims to be more portable. Not everyone feels the need to be burdened by a GPL'd kernel, or by Linux ya know.

    --
    The revolution will be mocked
  112. That's great and all, but... by sp- · · Score: 1

    ...I still want to hear about an Enlightenment/WindowMaker partnership...
    Now that would be one slick combination...
    just waiting to hear more from Rasterman about how E's development is coming...
    can't wait..

    ------------------------------------------
    Reveal your Source, Unleash the Power. (tm)

  113. I don't think it's a waste, exactly. by Ptolemarch · · Score: 2

    I think things might not be so bad as that. Those small applications couldn't have been all that much work, in the scheme of things. (Not to put-down the applications, certainly!) It seems to me to be wiser to consider them to be simple test cases of the greater architecture of GNOME or KDE.

    Which brings us to the next point, which would be: "Yeah, but isn't the simultaneous development of GNOME and KDE a waste of resources?"

    Were it the case that we knew exactly how we want to go in the desktop-look-and-feel arena, I would say yes. But do we? I personally see GNOME and KDE not as a dangerous schism (though it once was, and could be again in the future), but rather as two experimental designs that could merge to the final product.

    It's not always good for everyone to agree. The increased contemplation that accompanies a disagreement could spur more innovation. It's just good old-fashioned competition.

    We just need to keep the competition healthy and friendly, and pray for some compatibility.

    1. Re:I don't think it's a waste, exactly. by nix · · Score: 1

      If GNOME served no purpose other than to encourage Troll Tech to open QT then I'd say in the big scheme of things that the redundancy of the GNOME effort was worthwhile. But, I think that's just scratching the surface of the advantages that two GUI's competing for Linux can give us as long as both sides stride for interpretability.

  114. Finnally by moeman · · Score: 1

    I can't wait. I really want to install Linux on my moms computer. :-) Cooperation here will hopefully speed up Linux On the Desktop.

    --
    Ambition is a poor excuse for not having enough sense to be lazy.
    1. Re:Finnally by IntlHarvester · · Score: 2


      XFree is fast enough for normal applications. Maybe you're worried about games and the like, but there market share considerations are always going to outweigh raw speed.

      Personally, I think that the lack of an as-good-as-Windows web browser is more of a problem.
      --

      --
      Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
    2. Re:Finnally by warmi · · Score: 2

      Not much will change unless somebody comes up with something better than X. Current solution simply won't cut it - specially when compared with Windows ... It is much slower than Windows on the same hardware - this will be enough for many people to conclude that Linux is inferior to MS offerings ( and to tell the truth it is - when it comes to desktop functionality it definately is)

    3. Re:Finnally by ja · · Score: 1

      XFree is fast enough for normal applications. Maybe you're worried about games ... speed


      Right, but games that need speed are in the 3D realm, no?

      So X by itself is OK, but we need a fast OpenGL implementation, right?


      I think that both researchers and gamers can agree on this and Daryll Strauss is working on it.

      (http://www.linux3d.org)



      an as-good-as-Windows web browser ...

      Netscape is sick old man. We know it, Netscape knows it, and it is being replaced while you are reading these lines

      --

      send + more == money? ...
    4. Re:Finnally by larz · · Score: 1

      the gnome-1.0 dir on the ftp server has enlightenment in it...so gnome comes with E

    5. Re:Finnally by be-fan · · Score: 1

      Games are a big market consideration. You wouldnt think of it at first, but they do a lot to catapult a platform. And programming is not the only real app. You have 3D rendering, Photoshopping, Simulation, animation, etc and X does not cut it for that.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
  115. Re:Interesting news... by moeman · · Score: 1

    ummm. ya. In general you can already do that. infact, you don't have to actually run either WM, just have the libraries and such installed. Thats what I do....

    --
    Ambition is a poor excuse for not having enough sense to be lazy.
  116. More Windows Tips and Tricks! by IntlHarvester · · Score: 2


    You're right - Shift+Restart is the same as exiting Windows to DOS and then typing WIN to restart Windows. This is usually OK because most Windows users will have no drivers running in DOS.
    --

    --
    Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
  117. Re:The important thing here by IntlHarvester · · Score: 3


    Ah - but here's the problem. (My understanding is that any 'compound document' whether OLE or OpenParts is potentially an executable.) Sometimes you actually might wish to have scripts running automatically. (Think of JavaScript web pages for example.) As Microsoft has proved, flashing a "Do you really want to do this?" dialog box is no protection against stupid users.

    You can get around this by sandboxing, but the solution in Lotus Notes and MS Office 2000 is the ability to have all script macros cryptographically signed. An administrator-controlled excution control list defines what runs and what can't run. A client-server approach might also work, but it's looking like both Gnome and KDE are pretty much desktop-oriented, and some sort of controlling server might not jibe with Linux culture.

    Anyways, the standard Unix security answer of "it's a user space issue" ain't going to be good enough here. All MS Office viruses running under NT are user space only, and they're still raising plenty of hell.

    It's great to see that minds are converging on this issue. This give open projects a chance to develop a much better implementation than Microsoft, as well as develop an alternative to OLE/COM, which is pretty much the only game in town as far as user apps go.
    --

    --
    Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
  118. KDE/GNOME by warmi · · Score: 0

    Yeah, it is nice but don't you think it is quite idiotic that each of them comes with it's own help system, notepad, wordpad, bunch of _the same_ games and all kinds of other applets. I mean, it is simply waste of developers time. I can understand having to different desktops to choose from but what's the point of duplicating efforts creating all thoses little apps - instead of having dozen "advanced editors" I would rather have one that actually works. I know it is all free and practically nobody gets directly paid for doing all this stuff which makes harder for people to bitch about it but still, I they should do something about this nonsense. Maybe something will change ...

    1. Re:KDE/GNOME by Arandir · · Score: 1

      By this logic, it's a waste of time to have Emacs, Xemacs, VI, Joe, Xedit, etc. all be separate projects. It's a waste of time for Enlightenment and WindowMaker to compete. It's a waste of time developing all these different Linux distributions to begin with.

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
    2. Re:KDE/GNOME by extrasolar · · Score: 2
      I used to think so, but not anymore.

      Let me give you an example. Both desktops come with their own text editors. The really neat thing is that they go about text editing different ways. The KDE Advanced Editor is lightweight and has nice features such as syntax editing. On the other hand, GEdit has a multiple document interface and plug ins.

      The same thing goes with everything else. The office suits are broadly different. KOffice are many applications made to integrate together from the start in one suit. And Gnome Workshop are separate applications that integrate at the file level (I may be wrong about this, please correct me) so that other programs may be added as needed.

      I can go on with differences between IDEs, Calenders, and the rest of the programs. This is what competition offers that wouldn't have existed otherwise. Just thing where Linux would be now if the Hurd matured a little quicker.

      I think this is a different Open Source model than we are used to. ESR should write another essay.

      --

    3. Re:KDE/GNOME by drudd · · Score: 2

      Heck, its a waste to develop multiple operating systems... and I'm sure microsoft will back me up on this one :)

      Doug

      --
      Venn ist das nurnstuck git und Slotermeyer? Ya! Beigerhund das oder die Flipperwaldt gersput!
    4. Re:KDE/GNOME by teraflop+user · · Score: 1

      > I mean, it is simply waste of developers time.

      If they were being paid, maybe so. But since most of the developers work for the satisfaction of it, I don't think we really have much say in the matter.

      And of course, the competition leads to improvement and innovation.

  119. Re: lack of diversity --> Absurdity by warmi · · Score: 1

    I do not see anything absurd in my original question. It is one thing to have choice of different word processing software and another to have 10 notepad clones on your system.

  120. Re: lack of diversity --> Absurdity by warmi · · Score: 1

    I am saying that it is Saturday morning and you are definately trying to piss me off. But that's OK - it is your right, specially on a day when I don't feel up to your level of irony...

  121. Perhaps Panel Compatibility Later On? by Synic · · Score: 1

    I would like to either see all GTK and QT applications supporting the panel of both KDE and Gnome eventually, or at least making it very easy for the user to switch at runtime with a parameter!
    That way applications like KBiff, etc could be used under Gnome, and those like GTop and the Pager could be used under KDE. *That* would rock.

    I'm sure these talks about Corba and compatibility between the KDE and Gnome implementations is definitely a step in the right direction.

  122. Gnomers and K'ers... by Synic · · Score: 1

    ... collaborating and working along with one another? A short while ago, to suggest something like this would have generated a 300 post flame war on /.
    How far we've come... I hope we've all learned something along the way too.

  123. Superkit by ja · · Score: 1

    None of the sides wants to see their hard work being wasted just because some inexplicable whim favoured the other side. Therefore there is a natural tendency for collobaration.


    You say that the hardest part is the widget set?

    OK! Then this is the challenge then of the month:

    #define The unifying widgetset for Gnome and Kay.






    --

    send + more == money? ...
  124. Re:No Jokes? by geekd · · Score: 1

    What kinda AC humorless moron are you?

    The right to joke is everymans god given right... (or nature given, or whatever)

    A world (or Slashdot) without humor is a world I don't want to live in

    --Natalie Portman, topless

  125. Re:This is good and bad. by Compuser · · Score: 1

    I think the point is that if KDE and Gnome cooperate,
    you'll be able to run all apps with only one desktop
    installed. That'd be the goal anyway.

  126. This is good and bad. by Legerdemain · · Score: 2

    Its bad because:

    Personally I would like either Gnome "or" Kde. I do not want Gnome "and" Kde. Here is why:
    I don't want to have two sets of libraries on my machine taking up twice the memory/disk they should. If one choice is made, then less bloat.

    This will inevitably add to feature bloat so they will be "compatible".

    Its good because:

    Its a good baby step towards cooperation that may lead to one widget/library set being dropped.

    Thats a dream eh?

  127. It's very nice by Fizgig · · Score: 2

    Also recommended reading: Havoc's (sorry, forgot his last name!) weekly GNOME updates (availible from gnome.org). They paint a nice warm and fuzzy picture of GNOME and KDE getting along great, and they're pretty interesting. So both sides admit it; it's gotta be true!

    Though I would recommend not reading the gnome-kde mailing list (also availible at gnome.org) unless it relates to you. There is of course disagreement on the issues as they come up. I tried reading it, got scared, and am now happy with having my news filtered through GNOME weekly news. I lose details, but I can still be a Pollyana.

  128. Be nice. by raka · · Score: 1

    This is true, (it's probably more like going
    into single-user mode and then comming straigt
    back up). But I think the point was that
    it was a trick for restarting windows quickly.
    So, depending on how you use linux, this
    trick is _functionally_equivilent_ to restarting
    X, because it takes about the same time.

    Linux _has_ an advantage for people who do
    a lot of their work from the console though.
    (Like me).

  129. Re:It's Perception, not Reality by Arandir · · Score: 1

    I said that it's a perception. That some people believe this to be reality is unfortunate.

    --
    A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
  130. Re:We need more than one library too by Arandir · · Score: 2

    "Its a good baby step towards cooperation that may lead to one widget/library set being dropped"

    Having a choice of widgets/libraries is as important to a developer as having a choice of desktops is to the user.

    --
    A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
  131. KDE Moving Towards Artistic License? by Arandir · · Score: 3

    One thing not mentioned in this snippet, but which I've started to notice, is that KDE, and KOffice in particular, is moving more and more towards using the Artistic License.

    There is a perception (right or wrong) that the GPL cannot be used with any non-GPL libraries. Since Qt is free and open, but not GPL, there were many unwilling to touch the KDE code base. Strangely enough, by making KDE code Artistic, it will perceived to be more compatible with the GPL than if it remained GPL.

    --
    A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
  132. DUH! by Edward+Carter · · Score: 1

    This was bound to happen sooner or later. After all, the developers themselves tend not to have these silly "KDE (sux|roolz)! GNOME (roolz|sux)!" attitudes...

    1. Re:DUH! by jonnyGURU · · Score: 1

      Should've happened sooner than later! The reason so many people like Linux, open source, seems to be the same thing that brings it down. Too many developers, releases, windows managers, etc. Compatability DOES start to go out the window!

  133. his last name by Edward+Carter · · Score: 1

    Isn't it "Pennington"?

  134. You mispelled that! by Edward+Carter · · Score: 1

    GNOME roolz, you mean. Or perhaps GNOME r00lz. :)

  135. Re:Finally by JohnZed · · Score: 1

    Word on the street is that version 4.0 of XF86 should finally be kickin' it. Of course I agree with you that the current X, though laudable for its ever-improving hardware support and the dedication of its developers, has become a dinosaur. And that doesn't even mention the memory leaks! (I've found X can swell up to over 30 megs of RAM or more if I don't restart it).
    In general, though, I would advise anyone who plans to use either GNOME or KDE to buy 32 more megs of RAM than they would for a similar Windows box. At current memory prices (about $40 for that DIMM), that's still cheaper than buying Win 98.
    --JZ

  136. The important thing here by JohnZed · · Score: 4

    will be the establishment of the common CORBA mappings. I'd love to see KDE's KOM/Open Parts component model broaden to the point where I can easily write an app in GTK+ or GTK--, throw a KOM wrapper around it, and then use it seamlessly with KDE KOM parts. Imagine... A Gnumeric spreadsheet embedded in KWord!
    --JZ

    1. Re:The important thing here by Pinetops · · Score: 1


      It's actually a sandboxing issue. Because most MSApps are scriptable, it is very easy to have the scripts automatically executed on opening of the file.

      You need to disable or sandbox scripts recieved from foreign sources.

      Part of the problem of course, is that some of the standard interchange formats (.doc, .xls etc...) are actually executable formats!

    2. Re:The important thing here by Trojan · · Score: 1

      Scripting common tasks is more of a CORBA thing, IMO. That should be solvable, or they're not really using CORBA.

      Of course KOM/Bonobo (I don't think it's called Baboon anymore) interoperability would be ideal, but that seems unlikely to happen. Two variations of CORBA are still CORBA, but KOM/Bonobo have fundamental differences, or so I think.

    3. Re:The important thing here by zogulus · · Score: 1

      I believe there are large potential dangers with the current trend of integrating all the different applications running under an OS. If MS hadn't provided such an easy way for applications to access the mail system (MAPI) then the Melissa virus wouldn't have been possible...

      I understand that this is also due to Word's macro handling but my point is that the number of possible holes will get larger.

  137. Does this mean by Mr+T · · Score: 1
    no more sensless bashing of eash other's choice of desktop?

    I'm gonna miss it.

    --
    This is my signature. There are many signatures like it but this one is mine..
    1. Re:Does this mean by Pinetops · · Score: 2

      No of course not. Emacs and VI have always iteroperated, but did that stop anyone bickering? ;)

  138. Dissapointed w/ GNOME Leadership by tenchiken · · Score: 1

    Having been very pro-gnome for a long time (I like the user interface much better then KDE), I have to day that I am frankly disapointed w/ the attitude that the GNOME guys (and in particular one who disagreed with ideas floating around and allready wrote:

    "Anyways, I guess we are going to do what we think is correct; and you guys are going to do what you think is correct."

    (If you really want to know who wrote that, read the gnome-kde list).

    Wake up and smell the jolt. I am writing this on a NT 2000 box. The last thing Linux needs is for two of the small camps to be engaged in bickering. Yes.. There probibly is a better way to write something, but in the interest of "open specification and working together" deal.

  139. It's a matter of definition by extrasolar · · Score: 1
    I guess by *definition* Gnome is window manager agnostic and KDE uses KWM. But I guess there are people creating lightweight Gnome-specific windopw managers and their are other KDE-compliant window managers. So, you can say anything and both be right and flamed by slashdot brats(not everyone, mind you).

    Let's quite the politics game. Use whatever you like. Just don't say anything unless you accept you are both right and wrong at the same time.

    --

  140. Right by extrasolar · · Score: 1
    I am not sure of the details, but I think the thread was about the things that should go into the .desktop file. Both parties disagreed and the solution, if I remember correctly, was a wrapper that would do the correct thing for either desktop which I think is a far better than having one desktop change the other in the sake of interoperability.

    I think it is better to treat developers as developers and not as ambassadors.

    --

  141. Re:Wasn't this resolved? by extrasolar · · Score: 1
    What is GPL compatable then (besides the GPL)? I thought that the X liscense wasn't compatable either.

    --

  142. See? We learn something everyday! by extrasolar · · Score: 1
    Now don't hide everyone. I can just see 30 or 40 people thinking "Ah". Come on, admit it. I know I am not the only one who doesn't use drugs (in fact, we are a huge majority).

    Jee, the things you learn from the bickering between two ACs.

    --

    1. Re:See? We learn something everyday! by extrasolar · · Score: 1
      Oops. Im sorry for offending you. I just really dislike people thinking that using drugs is something people should do. It is not and I think people are starting to figure this out. If you think that most people do drugs because they want to and not to avoid being called "drug-free" boy, then I think you are mistaken in my view.

      I've heard of starbucks but microbrews? I think your perceptions are warped. Cut the stereotypes, boy.

      But I do admit I had alterior motives in mind. Sorry.

      --

  143. So does that mean... by SendBot · · Score: 2

    So are satan and hussein coming soon?

  144. My Netscape Communicator is leaking by fornix · · Score: 1

    Under the Gnome distro on the RH6 CD, Netscape Communicator swells up and brings X and my 64 megs to their knees every few days. Everything just locks up and then it's Ctrl-Alt-Backspace (becauase the Gnome logout selection on the panel doesn't seem to be connected to any code most of the time). I'm really looking forward to a leaner and meaner Mozilla.

  145. Huh??? by KingBob · · Score: 1

    Would you care to post the FULL details of your tremendously insightful "Scientific" study so we may all share the benefit of your great wisdom?

  146. Watch yourself there buddy... by KingBob · · Score: 1

    Dude, don't let 'em catch you referring to either as a "WM"! The politically correct term I have been advised is "Desktop Environment".

    You'll be on Springer before you can say - Enlightenment!

  147. Applets with source = education. by cynicthe · · Score: 1

    C'mon be a little less narrow minded.

    --
    The ship sank. Get over it. (This sig was cut out from another's shirt and painstakingly hand-posted)
  148. Re:DUH! -- BIGIT by PeelBoy · · Score: 1

    Think about it. One of them has to come first. Who's blowing the debate out of proportion again? Him or you?
    -----------------------

  149. Re: lack of diversity --> Absurdity by poopie · · Score: 2

    I extend your line of questioning to display it's absurdity

    - Why doesn't everyone focus on writing good apps for Windows instead of Linux?
    - Why do companies waste time developing non-intel processors?
    - Why do people around the world waste time learning/reading/writing/speaking non-english languages?
    - Why do students waste time doing problems listed in their books instead of inventing new problems?
    - Why do we need a dozen search engines?
    - Why do all these little countries need their own government?
    - Why do we need all these programming languages. Can't everyone use Java for everything?

  150. Interesting news... by LinuxTek · · Score: 1

    That's sure is great for the people that cannot decide which one is better. Soon they will be able to run an application written for either WM on the other (or at least one hopes).

    Lat3r

    --
    Signatures are supposed to be funny?
  151. KGNOME by Core-Pump · · Score: 1

    Some of you are missing one very important point.
    one of the mayor issues over linux is the fight over the two interfaces. And which one is really better. In one hand we have that for a GNOME user in a way its better because KDE users are pushing the limits, and GNOME wants to stay on track (JUST AN EXAMPLE LET'S NOTRAISE THE DUST!) so the development goes along pushed, in way. On the hand one of the biggest alies Microcrap(TM)(C) is the fact that they have developed a standart. (Right Dos... what 'standart') but is true no matter how bad the standart is, this has launched them as a stable source of DEVELOPMENT!!! not any other kind of... stable. Thus gaining more confidence in new programmers, and/or newbie users who really never had a choice. There is no confusion... just one interface. If the two efforts could some how collide in one big project (KDE+GNOME)...(most of are screaming enlightment i know... but let's leave it there for moment) a single more modern interface running on top of X could consolidate a very serious threat towards the beast in redmond. And u all know what that means... more pinguin users :)

    1. Re:KGNOME by carl_f · · Score: 1

      Dos is not a standard by ANY means (standart muse mean standard, right ?)

      (a) MS developed DOS ? IBM did and (regrettably) passed development over the MS in 88 or something.

      PC-DOS(IBM) DR-DOS(Digital Research), 4DOS (shareware command.com replacement, still nearly another dos) blah blah, even that thing on the old apricot my mum used to have was another dos.

      Dos is the minimalist operating system you could ever have. It has the most featureless, limit-riddled filesystem ever (8+3 filenames, max-128 root entrys, case insensitive, not case-preserving, 540mb limit without bios workarounds, 2gb limit PERIOD.) umm.. 640K memory limit (hmmm dont abuse me on that with talk of it being pc architecture or whatever, DOS is still not even an allowable word in current OS talks), no real hardware support/api's. everything is done by the applications directly (remember having to select your display type, and dma/irq/base for sound card ?) umm... whatever.

      I just dont think he raised any decent points in what he tried to go on about. so *THERE*
      hehe this is my first time on here.. maybe I should've done that Anonymous Coward thingy-magig.

    2. Re:KGNOME by carl_f · · Score: 1

      sorry for going on about DOS, but a sorta funny fact just occured to me.. I reckon MSCDEX was the only sorta-API it had. (shit.. I just realised that includes a mention of MS.. fuck. catch-22 trying to slag 'em off.. I better shut up now)

  152. Nothing wrong with the Trash-80 by soma813 · · Score: 1

    Sometimes you need something simple. I mean I'd rather play my atari vcs than a playstation or nintendo anyday. Simple addictive play. And the TRS-80, How can anything that runs off of Extended Color Basic be bad.

    Using a perty window manager may be a step forward, but so is Windows 2000. People should be free to use anything that they want without being attacked for not being in the heighth of fashion.

  153. Re:Finally by cameldrv · · Score: 1

    Yes, but if X were halfway decent, it would detect this and free them itself. That's like saying that there should be memory leaks in the kernel because apps forget to free() all of their memory. Everywhere else in Unix, once the process dies, all its resources are freed.

  154. Wasn't this resolved? by cameldrv · · Score: 1

    I thought Stallman announced when the QPL was released that it qualified as free software. Wouldn't this mean that it is compatable with the GPL?

  155. KDE/GNOME collaboration...or not? by GuidoDEV · · Score: 4
    The way I see it, this situation basically boils down to this--either a.) the two projects merge and we have a unified code-base, b.) the two projects do not merge, but cooperate closely with each other so that they are more or less completely compatible, or c.) they cooperate somewhat, but not very much(like now) and the two remain partially, but not wholly, compatible.

    Now the question naturally arises, "Which solution is best for the community as a whole"? Should we unify the codebase, thinking that a standard interface would promote application development? Or should we just cooperate and come up with a CORBA standard, but not necessarily an identical codebase, in the hope that such a move would encourage folks to write applications to that standard API and yet not alienate others who like their way of doing things(i.e., there is the die-hard gtk+ developer and the die-hard qt developer, one or both of whom could be angered, depending on the implementation). But what about just sticking with the status quo, where a little cooperation exists, but not nearly enough to come up with a standard CORBA API. After all, it seems to have worked pretty well so far, right?

    Now let us examine the options we have at hand. KDE, since it uses C++, tends to put off alot of traditional C developers, and GNOME, being C, tends to have very few apps developed for it in C++. Now we could have a big argument about the relative merits of each language, but in my opinion that's pointless, because what we need here is choice--the choice to develop your application in whatever language you are most comfortable using(within reason, of course). Of course, we could do that by consolidating KDE and GNOME and merely maintaining two widget sets, but to me that seems rather pointless, for simplicity and utility is the philosophy of Linux and U*ix in general, so there is really no need for creating a lot of confusion by having a "standard" which isn't really a standard. It would be standard in the sense that all the applications would be written for that single environment, but it would simultaneously be non-standard in that for one desktop environment we actually have two developmental trees, which would probably lead to having two of everything anyway.

    On the other hand, we could let things remain as they are, but the disadvantage of doing that is that a developer is forced towrite his application to one environment or the other, or go through a huge amount of effort to make sure that his program is compatible with both standards. This is obviously a great waste of time and energy which could be expended in developing a new application.

    Now we come to the solution which I prefer, namely, the development of a standard CORBA API through collaboration between the KDE/GNOME developers. This solution does not, of course, come without its own pitfalls and minefields as well. For instance, both KDE and GNOME could become very bloated in the process of becoming compatible with each other. This is a legitimate concern, but considering the code that we have seen from KDE/GNOME, I believe the developers there are capable of preventing this situation from occuring, and this way the programmer has a real choice as to which language he wishes to use, and doesn't need to compromise by writing to one environment only. It also serves to promote choice for the user as well, since there would ideally be two desktop environments, each with its own respective strengths and weaknesses as interpreted by the user. I don't think we really these environments to convert to the Windows philosophy of a one-size-fits-all Environment for Everyone.

    I'm sure that there are things I left out, but this was intended to provoke thoughtful dialogue, so if you have any ideas or input then please, by all means, post them here. I am certain that there are many other things we could do besides the three I came up with. What we need before making any decisions about the direction which GNOME and KDE will follow is a debate as to the merits of each option, so that we may be assured that the one we select to implement(or not, as the case may be) is the right choice.

  156. Stability issues by nitehorse · · Score: 1

    All that I can say is I really *really* hope that KDE doesn't make any stability sacrifices in order to be more GNOME-compliant.... If I want a really pretty and slightly crashy desktop with incredible themes and a screwy file manager that doesn't do what I tell it to, I use KDE2.0 (the CVS version.)

    It is really sweet. As a matter of fact, I'm posting from it right now- using Netscape. I have heard the complaints about it and I know why they exist- but as far as stability goes, Netscape makes the Konqueror look like a rickety bridge across a deep chasm. And Netscape crashes on me if I leave it on for more than an hour at a time... So far, the Konqueror has some really neat features and it is showing some real promise- but as DFaure says it's not ready for mass usage yet.

    I have had absolutely no real stability issues though, not with the stable versions of KDE. When I feel like taking a break, I go ahead and use KDE1.1.1- and I do use GNOME from time to time. Damn, I have to say this at least- on an AMD K6-2 300, with 64MB of RAM, it is sure perty... the problem is that it crashes at least as much as the KDE2.0/Konqueror combination. GNOME+GMC crashes and I am left with the haunting "gdk: an x io error occurred" line on the command prompt all too often when I do use GNOME. Altogether though, I'm glad that it does at least drop me back to the command line- at least the entire system doesn't require a reboot....

  157. Interesting development... by Jean-Paul · · Score: 1

    I don't think anyone is going to disagree about the fact that the cooperation between KDE and GNOME is beneficial. I don't think that one of the two widget sets will be adopted, however. In my opinion, there will be many widget sets--Qt, Gtk+, and others--each of them talking to an environment that combines the features and interfaces from both KDE and GNOME.

    I think the LSB should move in this area. Now don't get started--the LSB is attempting the address the "normal user," not hackers like you and I. Hackers like you and I like to fiddle around with stuff--it's why we're hackers. And Linux in its current state satisfies our needs beautifully.

    While the mainstream Linux distributions search for uniformity and standards compliance, there will always be the rogues, the hackers--you can't change that, and it would be stupid to try. But for everyone else, starting with a uniform standard base will be the way to go.

    I can't wait to see a desktop environment that will be friendly--nay, designed--for both KDE and GNOME applications.

    --
    --Jean-Paul Alderac
  158. FOR SOME PEOPLE IT IS FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVILENT by be-fan · · Score: 1

    Not every on uses the console. I have my linux machine boot right up to KDE. When X dies, so does most of my work. You can say what you want, but editing documents, programming, drawing, is much easier under a GUI than console. With the GUI you can do a bunch of things at the same time without swaping between consoles to see them.

    --
    A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...