/*I don't like the doc format kwm installs" != "kwm is undocumented". If you gonna gripe, gripe in ways that can be reasonably understood. */
/*What you aren't understanding is that to a Unix person, if the documentation is GUI-accessible only, it doesn't count. */
No really, next we'll need a GUI to read HTML files. I'll stop scoffing long enough to point out that lynx and w3m are very serviceable console browsers, mc, the console filemanager can display HTML quite well, and that man seems to use a markup langauge for its files.
So all you are really complaining about is that the KDE docs are not by default in your preferred choice of markup language. Thats not evil, by any definition. Most Unix software would be evil in your eyes in that case.
Plain ascii is even preferable to man format. I'm sure you can whip up a HTML to text tool in perl, hacker that you are reputed to be...
/* And it's in violation of the standard not to do it. */
The good thing about standards is the number of them we have to choose from. The standard help system format for GUI's is heading towards HTML, time to dump man. Even GNU dumped man years ago.
/* Evil: adj. Both evil and rude, but with the additional connotation that the rudeness was due to malice rather than incompetence. */
So your calling KDE's developers maliceful and / or incompetent, for not servicing your obscure needs, in their copious free time, already used in selflessly volounteering to develop KDE and make Unix better for other users?
Gee, why do all the documentation files mention keys not found on my keyboard? Or found only on the usually crappy keyboards of obscenely priced Unix machines. Why are the defaults so bizarre? The twm default config cannot even launch xterm - you have to start it in.xinitrc, since the twm menu only has Window operations and exit / restart
/* Certainly. I've also used Gnome and CDE. They are all highly Winix-biased (intuitive and familiar to Windows people, confusing and unintuitive to Unix people) and worse still, wholly undocumented. */
Intuitive to users of GUI's more recent than twm / X , and in the cases of MacOS, GEM, older GUI's than X / twm as well.
Non intuitive to Unix users? Those who lived out the PC / microcomputer revoloution in the server room not seeing daylight, maybe. Those who used any other GUI or OS, or even better Unix GUI's than twm, will find it intuitive.
Theres only so far you can tolerate users who cannot move the concept for clicking on something to clicking on something else. Waaah, I can't understand it. RTFM.... from the menu, under Help, if thats not *TOO* obvious?
Of course, KDE / KWM being wholly undocumented, those helpful words are a figment of my imagination, right?
1) man is standard for documentation only on Unix Systems 1b) Linux != Unix, its merely Unixlike
2) info is standard for documentation in GNU systems 2b) Linux is a kernel, with utils, its a GNU/Linux system 2c) Which is why linux's standard docs should be in info format
3) KDE is a graphical environment for Unix and Unixlike OS's 3b) Rather than pick one U*x documentation standard, it picked HTML. 3c) Being graphical, its help system is only a mouse click away (try using a mouse sometimes) 3d) if thats too hard, type kdehelp in your xterm 3e) The documentation for fvwm, twm et al is needed since there is no front end to configure it 3f) The alt-tab short cut is explicitly mentioned in the graphical configurator 3g) For folks like you, the rc file format is likewise documentated
Saying that man pages are good, is an attitude I cannot understand. They are obfuscated, jargon filled, and barely useful at best.
/* See POSIX for more details on this simple and minimal requirement */
Gee Linux is not posix compliant, why should a Desktop Environment be?
/* Anything else is ridiculous and leads right back to the Winix quagmire. */
Read : Anything else might be innovative and better, making me learn something new - so it must be bad. Lack of man files as documentation can be seen as a benefit, in these days of html help, images in documentation, hyperlinks and so on..
Just because it isn't old style Unix, does not mean it is not better Unix...
/* Maybe the FRONT key */
And choosing this would not be rewarding previous Unix experience how? Why not choose something likely to be on the actual keyboard of the majority of end users?
/* I got into this whole "red hat is too big and will squash the other distros" */
It will. Check out the support terms for other Linux distros in commercial software - often, none. Only supported on Redhat X.X
/* Red Hat giving GNOME (100% GPL as a core principle, not an afterthought) the chance to grab a foothold */
To the detriment of the Users desktop stability - just one in a long list of Redhats QA screwups.
/* I'm in full support of Red Hat, and will boycott any KDE-only distribution (i.e. Caldera and potentially Corel). */
Will you boycott any distro only supplying bash? Only supplying Xfree, only gcc, how far will you take your stance on choice? You pay the maker of the distro to select packages for you - and hopefully to get the best. No distro is inherently "anything only" to those with a net connection. I'm not going to use Debian if it doesn't come with KDE "officially". It would just make Linux to damn awkward.
/* Freedom of choice without bloat (sorry SUSE, 5CDs full of crap isn't going to cut it for "selection") */
Get current, its 6 Cd's. And you can exercise choice at install - it beats Redhats we won't include it, get it on the web at your own expense - without support.
I guess you have problems choosing for yourself.
Re:Gnome/KDE: for script kiddies and windoze wanna
on
October Gnome Released
·
· Score: 4
/* I know this is flame bait, but someone has to speak up: */
Elitist? Why not...
/* Why all the excitement for these sugar coating GUIs (KDE, GNOME, YADM). */
Because for the first time since its inception, X can be used in a consistent manner if a user so chooses? Because Ease of Use is finally delivered? Becasue we no longer need to think about syntax of Window Manager Configuration files?
/* Do i really give a ph*ck about themes? */
Do you really want a desktop in varying shades of ugly grey?
/* Can i impress the people in my office with the incredibly baroque-looking desktop i can configure? */
Windows User - hey, its like Windows NeXTStep User - hey, its like... OS/2, Mac, Acorn, Amiga User......
Get the picture?
/* Can i write a 100 line Perl CGI? */
In the easy to use, syntax highlighting editor with KDE yes, with Gnome, more than likely. Look ma! - programming without vi or emacs - editing made easy.
/* These are for script kiddies, Perl schmucks and wintel wannabes */
And people whose money will support hardware, software and ease of use development for Linux, while providing jobs for Unix geeks who program, document and package Linux. Sounds good to me.
/* You want to develop, make real applications, all you need is emacs, some good elisp packages, and a clean desktop */
A compiler always helps, too.
Emacs sucking is another flamewar - but the UI of eother vi or emacs is hostile to point and click, or even casual explanation. It can be mastered, to award yourself points for mastering the trivia of Unix.
A clean desktop - is this one with NO desktop functionality and a bunch of xterms? - thought so.
/* I agree that things like the CORBA interfaces to desktop service is an excellent idea. Yes, I know that htere are more than developers out there and they have there needs too/*
Nice to see them addressed after 20+ years of Unix.
/* But all you out there talk about is themes, and and whether it plays solitaire and trivial sh*t like that. Don't pretend. */
Themes are optional, and trendy, and playing solitaire is vital to the health of any office worker using Windows, and finally having a desktop to discuss is not trivial shit, given the wait Unix has had to get a desktop.
1) Debian will never, and cannot, give Debian friendly installers to all commerical Linux software products. Even now, when they are comparitively rare. 1b) Every installer I have seen allows you to choose a destination path. Put it in opt, install as not root if you want to be *SURE* your system will not be gratuitously messed with. 1c) apt get upgrade requires Debian packages to be made. See 1a
2a)Dependency checking and easy updating go out the Window when I must strip a deb to tar.gz , and don't convert well when making deb.rpm instead. 2b) Dependency checks suck on different systems using the same package management system - see the three way problem of using non native RPM's on SuSE, Caldera && Redhat + others. 2c) 2b will happen to Debian when its derivatives become popular and differ, even in trivial ways.
3a) Making hassles for vendors makes vendors Distribution specific or limited for support reasons (and also library problems) 3b) I don't like Software for Linux version 5.2, do you?
4) What newbie is going to be upgrading an entire distro - its much more likely that they want to install a single package, with a click, install. They probably do not know of dpkg -i or equivalent, and would not be too happy with it if they did. Newbies also do not know what they want or need to install / upgrade, so are unlikely to do so one package at a time, or all at once (over a typical net connection... ouch) 4b) You expect newbies to use the shell?;-) George Russell
/* The good news is, when I want a new application on my machine, it is as simple as typing "apt-get install xbill" and that's it. I'll never go back to the nightmare of proprietary software, which (in theory) requires reading a pages of legal jargon just and clicking ok about five times just to set up a single program. */
So what do I type to install, say, StarOffice? WordPerfect? RailRoad Tycoon or Call to Power? Lets try Quake 3? One of the new DBMS systems like SyBase? Realaudio? apt isn't looking so hot is it?
apt and the Loki installer are aimed at different software types. apt is system maintence for Debian. Lokis installer is an installer for software supplied on a physical medium (ie a CD) licensed to be installed on one machine. That it is open source means it can be made to work well, unlike other similar purpose installers, seen on Windows.
No Wordperfect (no good Wordprocessor) No Qt (No KDE, no Good DE(for a long time, at least)), No StarOffice (no Good Office Suite), No Xforms (No LyX, no easy frontend for TeX), no Good Documentation (other distros hav the same as Debian, plus more ala SuSE's manual && support database) and No xv (no shareware) and No Acrobat (no binary only freeware)and No good browser (Netscape)
Some of these are packaged, but its not "Official"
That's SuSE. CD 6 is source code. Although there are "only" 1300 packages, who needs 20+ text editors in one distro ( and SuSE comes close to that)
/*YOU get to pick and choose what you apps you want running on your system. You have much more control over your system, if you dont like a particular ftp server or dhcp client fine you have a choice, install your favourite. */
Um, what distro forces you to install every daemon, server and client? Install your own.
/* With debian its a hassle free incremental upgrade every day. */
Assuming good, cheap netaccess. At least dselect is gone (or is it?)
/* One thing redhat and mandrake have over debian is a really nice default X-windows layout */
Every other distro bar Slackware offers better ease of installation, configuration and use than Debian. It doesn't seem too hard to do so either.
(Debian would be nice if it weren't so political. But then it wouldn't be Debian;-))
/*This is a terrible idea. Loki should release their software in standard.deb/.rpm package formats and let the distributions handle installation, dependencies, removal, and upgrades. This is what distributions do! Let them do it! We don't need an "Install Shield". */
Er.. Yes we do. Tried to install xyz deb on Redhat? vice versa? alien is not a panacea. How about either on Slackware? Redhat RPMS on SuSE - I have had ones that failed, even with compat installed. tar.gz is the only distribution neutral system - and for what do you need package management when commercial software is supposed to install into/opt/packagname anyway? Uninstall is through the tradtional, flexible and powerful (albeit rather unfriendly) rm -rf/opt/packagename
Its also a hassle to package for each obscure little variant of Linux with different packagmanagement, libc's, et al, and then try and do installation support.
/*You want this to make it easier for the newbie? Why ask the newbie to learn yet another installer when he already knows one for his distribution?*/
What newbie ever learned to use their package manager at levels lower than point and click? They don't have to use anything else for this installer either.
/*From the sound of things they plan to write stuff, but not GPL it. */
What a crime. Thats how you can add value to and make money from Linux - write a good config tool, ala YaST from SuSE or EasyLinuxes config tools, and DON'T GPL it, so you aren't ripped off and under cut by rivals ala Redhat vs Mandrake.
This may offend the idealogically pure. It may also make linux easier to install, configure, and use, and subsidise further Linux development.
I have seen Linux distros of only free software - they tend to be rougher at the edges, and contain less usable software. There is a reason why Caldera and SuSE sell many copies - and this is it.
Please note that the themes in KDE 1.1.2 are kwm themes, not Widget themeing, ala Gnome themes. For widget themeing, please check out the alpha CVS code.
For your information, the latest version of rxvt, 2.6.0 or above, can do transparency. It beats Eterm, since it does not require any special program to set the root window - ie it works with KDE's kbgndwm or xloadimage or whatever. See www.rxvt.org for a latest version.
There are patches to KDE's wallpaper setter floating around which make it work with Eterm. Search the archive of the KDE user mailing list (on the web at www.kde.org)
Thirdly, the konsole program in KDE 2.0 supports transparency - so if you download the CVS versions, have fun.
It gets you ease of Learning. It lets you concentrate on learning and coding the language, not in the arcana of makefiles, commandline options, grep and reg exp. It lets you browse the structure of your project easily, to find a function / object/variable / whatever. It should automate trivia like creting a new project with a makefile etc.
Might also add searchable help and GUI layout tools, and integrated debugging.
Best of all, it saves me from learning more than the basics of vim or emacs.
It isn't really necessary to learn these - at least, not if you can find an IDE to handle it for you. I'm familiar with KDevelop, the KDE IDE, but I'm sure Gnome has an equivalent - Glade perhaps?
Anyway, these have a wizard which sets up your project - autoconf, automake etc, as well as.lsm files, README, Changelog, license, and the addition of new files etc pretty much as you'll find in any GNU software. It means you can learn the language rather than how to use Unix as a development system - which can be done later (in my copious free time)
I thinks its best to relegate make files to being out of sight, out of mind, since their not the most friendly of things to look upon.
You might want to check out the LDP's Linux Programmers Guide as well.
I have it now, It runs on this system, which, god willing, touch wood, can run for ~10 years without major failure. If theres something worth swapping for then, we'll see.
Visicalc is on the internet from its author for free. Running a spreadsheet with a 28k binary is rather nice - especially on my previous antique hardware.
The upgrade treadmill is a state of mind. Free beer is good. Drink deep. In short, the future of SOffice is a minor concern - it already meets my needs - it did so in Version 3 as I recall.
Theres always something better if I ever want to pay.
Do you care for Open Source / Free Software or Linux? I'll take Linux, since I've never bought the politics, and use Linux only as a way of a) Getting x86 Unix Cheap and b) getting a good PC OS. and c) Development tools
StarOffice is freeware. All software that requires no costly payments is good software.
Its also an example of it being better to have cross platform software than Open software.
Slashdot Mirror
/*I don't like the doc format kwm installs" != "kwm is undocumented". If you gonna gripe, gripe in ways that can be reasonably understood. */
/*What you aren't understanding is that to a Unix person, if the documentation is GUI-accessible only, it doesn't count. */
No really, next we'll need a GUI to read HTML files. I'll stop scoffing long enough to point out that lynx and w3m are very serviceable console browsers, mc, the console filemanager can display HTML quite well, and that man seems to use a markup langauge for its files.
So all you are really complaining about is that the KDE docs are not by default in your preferred choice of markup language. Thats not evil, by any definition. Most Unix software would be evil in your eyes in that case.
Plain ascii is even preferable to man format. I'm sure you can whip up a HTML to text tool in perl, hacker that you are reputed to be...
/* And it's in violation of the standard not to do it. */
The good thing about standards is the number of them we have to choose from. The standard help system format for GUI's is heading towards HTML, time to dump man. Even GNU dumped man years ago.
/* Evil: adj. Both evil and rude, but with the additional connotation that the rudeness was due to malice rather than incompetence. */
So your calling KDE's developers maliceful and / or incompetent, for not servicing your obscure needs, in their copious free time, already used in selflessly volounteering to develop KDE and make Unix better for other users?
Perhaps you are merely immature.
/* And what confusion would that be? */
.xinitrc, since the twm menu only has Window operations and exit / restart
Gee, why do all the documentation files mention keys not found on my keyboard? Or found only on the usually crappy keyboards of obscenely priced Unix machines. Why are the defaults so bizarre? The twm default config cannot even launch xterm - you have to start it in
/* What did they do to deserve the pain? */
Tried to use a Unix variant as a desktop?
/* Certainly. I've also used Gnome and CDE. They are all highly Winix-biased (intuitive and familiar to Windows people, confusing and unintuitive to Unix people) and worse still, wholly undocumented. */
Intuitive to users of GUI's more recent than twm / X , and in the cases of MacOS, GEM, older GUI's than X / twm as well.
Non intuitive to Unix users? Those who lived out the PC / microcomputer revoloution in the server room not seeing daylight, maybe. Those who used any other GUI or OS, or even better Unix GUI's than twm, will find it intuitive.
Theres only so far you can tolerate users who cannot move the concept for clicking on something to clicking on something else. Waaah, I can't understand it. RTFM.... from the menu, under Help, if thats not *TOO* obvious?
Of course, KDE / KWM being wholly undocumented, those helpful words are a figment of my imagination, right?
FYI -
1) man is standard for documentation only on Unix Systems
1b) Linux != Unix, its merely Unixlike
2) info is standard for documentation in GNU systems
2b) Linux is a kernel, with utils, its a GNU/Linux system
2c) Which is why linux's standard docs should be in info format
3) KDE is a graphical environment for Unix and Unixlike OS's
3b) Rather than pick one U*x documentation standard, it picked HTML.
3c) Being graphical, its help system is only a mouse click away (try using a mouse sometimes)
3d) if thats too hard, type kdehelp in your xterm
3e) The documentation for fvwm, twm et al is needed since there is no front end to configure it
3f) The alt-tab short cut is explicitly mentioned in the graphical configurator
3g) For folks like you, the rc file format is likewise documentated
Saying that man pages are good, is an attitude I cannot understand. They are obfuscated, jargon filled, and barely useful at best.
/* See POSIX for more details on this simple and minimal requirement */
Gee Linux is not posix compliant, why should a Desktop Environment be?
/* Anything else is ridiculous and leads right back to the Winix quagmire. */
Read : Anything else might be innovative and better, making me learn something new - so it must be bad. Lack of man files as documentation can be seen as a benefit, in these days of html help, images in documentation, hyperlinks and so on..
Just because it isn't old style Unix, does not mean it is not better Unix...
/* Maybe the FRONT key */
And choosing this would not be rewarding previous Unix experience how? Why not choose something likely to be on the actual keyboard of the majority of end users?
You could, of course, use the GUI theme creator to create your own KDE theme...
George Russell (russell@kde.org)
E is KDE compliant as Of 0.16 - so it'll work with the taskbar.
George Russell
/* I got into this whole "red hat is too big and will squash the other distros" */
It will. Check out the support terms for other Linux distros in commercial software - often, none. Only supported on Redhat X.X
/* Red Hat giving GNOME (100% GPL as a core principle, not an afterthought) the chance to grab a foothold */
To the detriment of the Users desktop stability - just one in a long list of Redhats QA screwups.
/* I'm in full support of Red Hat, and will boycott any KDE-only distribution (i.e. Caldera and potentially Corel). */
Will you boycott any distro only supplying bash? Only supplying Xfree, only gcc, how far will you take your stance on choice? You pay the maker of the distro to select packages for you - and hopefully to get the best. No distro is inherently "anything only" to those with a net connection. I'm not going to use Debian if it doesn't come with KDE "officially". It would just make Linux to damn awkward.
/* Freedom of choice without bloat (sorry SUSE, 5CDs full of crap isn't going to cut it for "selection") */
Get current, its 6 Cd's. And you can exercise choice at install - it beats Redhats we won't include it, get it on the web at your own expense - without support.
I guess you have problems choosing for yourself.
/* I know this is flame bait, but someone has to speak up: */
/*
Elitist? Why not...
/* Why all the excitement for these sugar coating GUIs (KDE, GNOME, YADM). */
Because for the first time since its inception, X can be used in a consistent manner if a user so chooses? Because Ease of Use is finally delivered?
Becasue we no longer need to think about syntax of Window Manager Configuration files?
/* Do i really give a ph*ck about themes? */
Do you really want a desktop in varying shades of ugly grey?
/* Can i impress the people in my office with the incredibly baroque-looking desktop i can configure? */
Windows User - hey, its like Windows
NeXTStep User - hey, its like...
OS/2, Mac, Acorn, Amiga User......
Get the picture?
/* Can i write a 100 line Perl CGI? */
In the easy to use, syntax highlighting editor with KDE yes, with Gnome, more than likely. Look ma! - programming without vi or emacs - editing made easy.
/* These are for script kiddies, Perl schmucks and wintel wannabes */
And people whose money will support hardware, software and ease of use development for Linux, while providing jobs for Unix geeks who program, document and package Linux. Sounds good to me.
/* You want to develop, make real applications, all you need is emacs, some good elisp packages, and a clean desktop */
A compiler always helps, too.
Emacs sucking is another flamewar - but the UI of eother vi or emacs is hostile to point and click, or even casual explanation. It can be mastered, to award yourself points for mastering the trivia of Unix.
A clean desktop - is this one with NO desktop functionality and a bunch of xterms? - thought so.
/* I agree that things like the CORBA interfaces to desktop service is an excellent idea. Yes, I know that htere are more than developers out there and they have there needs too
Nice to see them addressed after 20+ years of Unix.
/* But all you out there talk about is themes, and and whether it plays solitaire and trivial sh*t like that. Don't pretend. */
Themes are optional, and trendy, and playing solitaire is vital to the health of any office worker using Windows, and finally having a desktop to discuss is not trivial shit, given the wait Unix has had to get a desktop.
George Russell
Let me answer as well.
.rpm instead.
... ouch) ;-)
1) Debian will never, and cannot, give Debian friendly installers to all commerical Linux software products. Even now, when they are comparitively rare.
1b) Every installer I have seen allows you to choose a destination path. Put it in opt, install as not root if you want to be *SURE* your system will not be gratuitously messed with.
1c) apt get upgrade requires Debian packages to be made. See 1a
2a)Dependency checking and easy updating go out the Window when I must strip a deb to tar.gz , and don't convert well when making deb
2b) Dependency checks suck on different systems using the same package management system - see the three way problem of using non native RPM's on SuSE, Caldera && Redhat + others.
2c) 2b will happen to Debian when its derivatives become popular and differ, even in trivial ways.
3a) Making hassles for vendors makes vendors Distribution specific or limited for support reasons (and also library problems)
3b) I don't like Software for Linux version 5.2, do you?
4) What newbie is going to be upgrading an entire distro - its much more likely that they want to install a single package, with a click, install. They probably do not know of dpkg -i or equivalent, and would not be too happy with it if they did. Newbies also do not know what they want or need to install / upgrade, so are unlikely to do so one package at a time, or all at once (over a typical net connection
4b) You expect newbies to use the shell?
George Russell
/* The good news is, when I want a new application on my machine, it is as simple as typing "apt-get install xbill" and that's it. I'll never go back to the nightmare of proprietary software, which (in theory) requires reading a pages of legal jargon just and clicking ok about five times just to set up a single program. */
So what do I type to install, say, StarOffice? WordPerfect? RailRoad Tycoon or Call to Power? Lets try Quake 3? One of the new DBMS systems like SyBase? Realaudio? apt isn't looking so hot is it?
apt and the Loki installer are aimed at different software types. apt is system maintence for Debian. Lokis installer is an installer for software supplied on a physical medium (ie a CD) licensed to be installed on one machine. That it is open source means it can be made to work well, unlike other similar purpose installers, seen on Windows.
hth
George Russell
/* Debian is the only FULL linux distribution */
;-))
Containing only software following the DFSG.
No Wordperfect (no good Wordprocessor) No Qt (No KDE, no Good DE(for a long time, at least)), No StarOffice (no Good Office Suite), No Xforms (No LyX, no easy frontend for TeX), no Good Documentation (other distros hav the same as Debian, plus more ala SuSE's manual && support database) and No xv (no shareware) and No Acrobat (no binary only freeware)and No good browser (Netscape)
Some of these are packaged, but its not "Official"
Completeness by a strange definition.
/* aproaching 1.6GB (i386) of compressed binaries (not counting source) */
5 CD's, 650Mb x 5 = 3250Mb.
That's SuSE. CD 6 is source code. Although there are "only" 1300 packages, who needs 20+ text editors in one distro ( and SuSE comes close to that)
/*YOU get to pick and choose what you apps you want running on your system. You have much more control over your system, if you dont like a particular ftp server or dhcp client fine you have a choice, install your favourite. */
Um, what distro forces you to install every daemon, server and client? Install your own.
/* With debian its a hassle free incremental upgrade every day. */
Assuming good, cheap netaccess. At least dselect is gone (or is it?)
/* One thing redhat and mandrake have over debian is a really nice default X-windows layout */
Every other distro bar Slackware offers better ease of installation, configuration and use than Debian. It doesn't seem too hard to do so either.
(Debian would be nice if it weren't so political. But then it wouldn't be Debian
George Russell
/*This is a terrible idea. Loki should release their software in standard .deb/.rpm package formats and let the distributions handle installation, dependencies, removal, and upgrades. This is what distributions do! Let them do it! We don't need an "Install Shield". */
/opt/packagname anyway? Uninstall is through the tradtional, flexible and powerful (albeit rather unfriendly) rm -rf /opt/packagename
Er.. Yes we do. Tried to install xyz deb on Redhat? vice versa? alien is not a panacea. How about either on Slackware? Redhat RPMS on SuSE -
I have had ones that failed, even with compat installed. tar.gz is the only distribution neutral system - and for what do you need package management when commercial software is supposed to install into
Its also a hassle to package for each obscure little variant of Linux with different packagmanagement, libc's, et al, and then try and do installation support.
/*You want this to make it easier for the newbie? Why ask the newbie to learn yet another installer when he already knows one for his distribution?*/
What newbie ever learned to use their package manager at levels lower than point and click? They don't have to use anything else for this installer either.
George Russell
/*From the sound of things they plan to write stuff, but not GPL it. */
What a crime. Thats how you can add value to and make money from Linux - write a good config tool, ala YaST from SuSE or EasyLinuxes config tools, and DON'T GPL it, so you aren't ripped off and under cut by rivals ala Redhat vs Mandrake.
This may offend the idealogically pure. It may also make linux easier to install, configure, and use, and subsidise further Linux development.
I have seen Linux distros of only free software - they tend to be rougher at the edges, and contain less usable software. There is a reason why Caldera and SuSE sell many copies - and this is it.
George Russell
Please note that the themes in KDE 1.1.2 are kwm themes, not Widget themeing, ala Gnome themes. For widget themeing, please check out the alpha CVS code.
HTH
George Russell
For your information, the latest version of rxvt, 2.6.0 or above, can do transparency. It beats Eterm, since it does not require any special program to set the root window - ie it works with KDE's kbgndwm or xloadimage or whatever. See www.rxvt.org for a latest version.
There are patches to KDE's wallpaper setter floating around which make it work with Eterm. Search the archive of the KDE user mailing list (on the web at www.kde.org)
Thirdly, the konsole program in KDE 2.0 supports transparency - so if you download the CVS versions, have fun.
HTH
George Russell (russell@kde.org)
It gets you ease of Learning. It lets you concentrate on learning and coding the language, not in the arcana of makefiles, commandline options, grep and reg exp. It lets you browse the structure of your project easily, to find a function / object /variable / whatever. It should automate trivia like creting a new project with a makefile etc.
Might also add searchable help and GUI layout tools, and integrated debugging.
Best of all, it saves me from learning more than the basics of vim or emacs.
It isn't really necessary to learn these - at least, not if you can find an IDE to handle it for you. I'm familiar with KDevelop, the KDE IDE, but I'm sure Gnome has an equivalent - Glade perhaps?
.lsm files, README, Changelog, license, and the addition of new files etc pretty much as you'll find in any GNU software. It means you can learn the language rather than how to use Unix as a development system - which can be done later (in my copious free time)
Anyway, these have a wizard which sets up your project - autoconf, automake etc, as well as
I thinks its best to relegate make files to being out of sight, out of mind, since their not the most friendly of things to look upon.
You might want to check out the LDP's Linux Programmers Guide as well.
I have it now, It runs on this system, which, god willing, touch wood, can run for ~10 years without major failure. If theres something worth swapping for then, we'll see.
Visicalc is on the internet from its author for free. Running a spreadsheet with a 28k binary is rather nice - especially on my previous antique hardware.
The upgrade treadmill is a state of mind.
Free beer is good. Drink deep. In short, the future of SOffice is a minor concern - it already meets my needs - it did so in Version 3 as I recall.
Theres always something better if I ever want to pay.
Do you care for Open Source / Free Software or Linux? I'll take Linux, since I've never bought the politics, and use Linux only as a way of a) Getting x86 Unix Cheap and b) getting a good PC OS. and c) Development tools
StarOffice is freeware. All software that requires no costly payments is good software.
Its also an example of it being better to have cross platform software than Open software.
(Piracy, otoh, is not always good or bad)