Yes, that might be true if you're running your debian more closely on the edge. But when you're running stable and doing an dist-upgrade from one older stable to a new stable it should all work fine.
The problem is that apt doesn't do all magic by itself. It still needs good managers of the packages creating good dependencies and pre/post-install-scripts.
But really when you're messing with your system almost everything is to show you its weak spots. I 'm helping a friend out with his rpm based system which is really starting to malfunction due to the exact same treatment.
Everyone is complaining about that Debians installer is to hard. But there has been several attempts on creating easy installers for Debian such as Stormix, Corel, and Progeny. Now there is Xendros (former Corel) and Libranet. Libranet is an uptodate debian with an easy installer.
If you want them to continue and improve there work, support them!
It has worked quite beautifully on most of the mozilla/galeon version I've tested it with. I can assure you that it works under galeon 1.0.3 and 1.2.0.
I think quake3 has left bytecode and gone for native formats such as.dll's and.so's. In quake1 they used bytecode that compiled to a file called progs.rc.
If your interested in learning how to make your own debian packages I would recommend you to check out the "Debian New Maintainers' Guide" that can be found here: http://www.debian.org/doc/devel-manuals#maint-guid e
It is. Im a sid user and I used to use ximians debs but debian was actually faster releasing packages for gnome 1.4 and the packages is now of very high quality.
Don't applications have to be added to the Red Carpet database before they show up on people's desktops? What is needed is a simple installation procedure that doesn't require the software to be one of the offerings in Red Carpet (or something like it).
This is going to be almost impossible as long as library dependencies are an issue. I'm no guru, but there has to be some way around this.
Is this really such a problem? Look at how apt and debian works. All the programs that an average user needs stored in a central place. No searching! Just choose what you want to install and there you go. No such thing as different installation programs for different applications such as in windows. They all share a common frontend (debconf) and the installation is done by thrusted, high quality applications such as dpkg.
Red Carpet and apt is absolutly the way to go! It might not be there now but its constantly evolving!
Your just talking about the compiler arent you? Just because a g++ compiler exist on the system doesnt mean it can compile c++ code from Linux.
I have been following fink. A project to package open source applications for Mac OSX. If you check out the currently existing packages you will see that gnome is alot more succesful then kde when it comes to number of packages.
Seriously, KDE has (or at least had) serious problems that prevent a port to Mac OS X. It assumes it can do things with shared libraries that are only possible on ELF systems like Linux, *BSD and Solaris. It could very well be that some people are trying to port it nevertheless, but we haven't heard of any breakthroughs yet. Note that Qt is a different story, we have a package for it and it works fine.
Excerpt from/usr/share/doc/mozilla/copyright:
"Some files in this source package are under the Netscape Public License
Others, under the Mozilla Public license, and just to confuse you even
more, some are dual licensed MPL/GPL."
The GPL is included
I think you two guys have lost it here! The DE of Linux is currently splitted due to that there is two camps of people with different definitions of the word "free".
Slashdot Mirror
I've heard that Nautilus in Gnome 2 should have gained a real speedboost. So it's well maintained and that it would be replaced is very unlikely.
But if your really looking for a more lightweight filemanager you might want to look into Gnome Commander, a Norton Commander look-a-like.
more effectively?
It's to vague! If you want a solid estimation of how long time it would take you have to be more specific.
I would say something like:
When will we see OpenOffice and Mozilla integrated as good into Gnome as MS Office and IE in Windows?
Yes, that might be true if you're running your debian more closely on the edge. But when you're running stable and doing an dist-upgrade from one older stable to a new stable it should all work fine.
The problem is that apt doesn't do all magic by itself. It still needs good managers of the packages creating good dependencies and pre/post-install-scripts.
But really when you're messing with your system almost everything is to show you its weak spots. I 'm helping a friend out with his rpm based system which is really starting to malfunction due to the exact same treatment.
You dont need the original road to create a new one. The thing you need is to be able to link with it! =) The LGPL could do just fine here.
Everyone is complaining about that Debians installer is to hard. But there has been several attempts on creating easy installers for Debian such as Stormix, Corel, and Progeny. Now there is Xendros (former Corel) and Libranet. Libranet is an uptodate debian with an easy installer.
If you want them to continue and improve there work, support them!
It might not be that many of these companies haven't got the well establized usercrowd to be profitable?
metatheme is the gnome answer to that. Its a theme that setups everything from gtk+, nautilus, sawfish and xmms.
Here's an article that says the opposite:t to.html
http://www.linuxandmain.com/tech/xibre
It has worked quite beautifully on most of the mozilla/galeon version I've tested it with. I can assure you that it works under galeon 1.0.3 and 1.2.0.
I think quake3 has left bytecode and gone for native formats such as .dll's and .so's. In quake1 they used bytecode that compiled to a file called progs.rc.
Some parts of it compiles under PPC. But mono is a big project so its hard to say how useful it is for the average developer =)
p ublic/mono-list/ 2002-March/003528.html
They are working on an OS X/Darwin port too!
To back up my statement:
[Mono-list] (MacOSX) Requesting porting guide clarifications
http://lists.ximian.com/archives/
That shouldn't happen, then you have a faulty rpm. In debian both gtk libraries works fine together.
I dont know what Linux distribuion you use, but I use debian and Im very pleased with it. It is one of the biggest distribution Ive heard.
g es.debian.org/qps
Anyway check out your packages and they exist in all branches. Take a look for yourself at:
http://packages.debian.org/gentoo
http://packa
I think wxwindows could become something like this if the wxqt port would take of.
If your interested in learning how to make your own debian packages I would recommend you to check out the "Debian New Maintainers' Guide" that can be found here: http://www.debian.org/doc/devel-manuals#maint-guid e
It is. Im a sid user and I used to use ximians debs but debian was actually faster releasing packages for gnome 1.4 and the packages is now of very high quality.
This is going to be almost impossible as long as library dependencies are an issue. I'm no guru, but there has to be some way around this.
Is this really such a problem? Look at how apt and debian works. All the programs that an average user needs stored in a central place. No searching! Just choose what you want to install and there you go. No such thing as different installation programs for different applications such as in windows. They all share a common frontend (debconf) and the installation is done by thrusted, high quality applications such as dpkg.
Red Carpet and apt is absolutly the way to go! It might not be there now but its constantly evolving!
In the FAQ you can see the question "Q: Why are there no packages for KDE?" that sais:
Im using APT 0.5.3 and I can do:
apt-get build-dep
From the help of apt-get:
build-dep - Configure build-dependencies for source packages
This should do pretty mush what ports do!
Ehm? What? Separation between data and code must be an advantage, such as in XML/XSL. Right?
Excerpt from /usr/share/doc/mozilla/copyright:
"Some files in this source package are under the Netscape Public License
Others, under the Mozilla Public license, and just to confuse you even
more, some are dual licensed MPL/GPL."
The GPL is included
I think you two guys have lost it here! The DE of Linux is currently splitted due to that there is two camps of people with different definitions of the word "free".
It's even officially supported.
>(perhaps unstable is too stable :) I know I am damned surprized when something in it breaks majorly)
You'r right! It's time to move to experimental to be on the cutting edge! =)
dlocate works too!