> Fedora's print config utility worked great for > all my printers. It took about 3 or 4 clicks and > I was done.
I also use Fedora and I know this tool but I tend not to use it and configure my printers manually via cups config files.
But ESR is kind of right with this dialog (but not with CUPS as CUPS is not the issue). I mean it adds locally connected printers just fine. But it is problematic when you wish to share a printer - you need to know all the terminology (SMB, IPP, LPD etc.) and bit of networking. So average grandma would fail on this tool.
> Oh I am not blaming cups for it except it would > be nice if they had included the PPD. I did not > buy the printer it is our office network > printer. The problem how many printers come with > "Linux" stickers on them?
I don't know how many. This one that I've bought yesterday has in fact a big sticker saying "Works with Windows, Mac OS X and variety of Linux system" sticked on front.
> Yea I can look it up and hope that the info is > up to date but it would be nice if they came > with Linux drivers on the cd.
Yes but I don't find it really to be a problem - usually when you buy some hardware you investigate prior, read reviews and such to have an insight on what is aviable and make a proper choice. If you intrested in printers for Linux use you just can go to this site:
http://linuxprinting.org/suggested.html
And you will find variety of devices ranging from home to big monsters working with Linux.
PPD is PPD - it is not Windows nor Linux nor any other system. It is quite standard.
To be honest it is Xerox flaw, with HP you get PPD files on CDs in separate directories. Also just today I've purchased Samsung LCP-500 which is cheap semi professional color laser printer. The printer came with CD and Linux drivers. So it is due to vendor to support drivers.
Look nobody will buy unsupported printer in order to use it with Linux - this is quite normal. Also nobody claims that every plastic-crappy-printer-bought-in-supermarket will work with Linux.
Well but this argument is not over CUPS itself - CUPS is just printing engine - it can have multiple frontends like MOX's one (good), Fedora's one (apparently bad), Mandrivas one, SuSE's one etc. you can even go to/etc/cups/ and use your $EDITOR and it will be fine. CUPS is not about config GUI - it is about few config files than you can edit and config files themselves are quite OK for me.
It is the same like you would say that Apache is not friendly because some distros GUI sucks... It is not the point about Apache but about this one distro tools. I know printing is more desktop oriented but it still applies here - with CUPS you can do a lot of magic (setting queues, browsing protocol, print accounting etc.) - no GUI IMHO will ever implement control of everything that CUPS can do. Either no GUI will ever implement control of everything that Apache can do...
It is not about CUPS - look at Apple guys, they did it well and they are still on CUPS.
PS. But the web interface could be a little prettier than it is now.;)
It has little to do with CUPS itself. It is rather Fedora's system-config-printer-gui fault. Go check out other distributions - namely SuSE or Mandriva (former Mandrake) - each of them handles this by their own tool - YaST (SuSE) and Mandriva Control Center... Go, see how it looks and think again not to generalize stupid stuff like:
Fedora's printer config dialog sucks -> Linux printing status: unfriendly.
> the OO.org 2.0 beta has so far required non-RPM > Linux users (or those who want to have a single- > user installation of the beta version) to build > from source
No it has not. You could build from source but in fact you just could unpack RPMS and copy files to their locations - and it would probably work (I don't know which obscure Linux distro you was using). Also most Linux distros worth using has something like developement versions - so you simply grab packages from developement tree. It is where beta versions grow up.
So building from source was not *required* nor even recommended.
(...)
> I was recently looking at open source projects > that I might contribute to, and-- in my case at > least --OO.org was counted out on the basis of > build complexity.
You can contribute on loads of other ways than coding. Your entire argument is based on claim that you need to compile it due to test it - this is not true so your whole argument is false.
(...)
> The solution? Simlplify the build process for > the casual coder.
Here you are probably right. It is something that OOo devs mentioned in interviews and such. They are already working on that - but this requires time. It is large codebase so it is not easy to change it all.
> I imagine that many users find it particularly > annoying that if they want to, say, create a new > spreadsheet, they must launch OO.o, which puts > them in Writer, then go to File->New Spreadsheet > in order to get to Calc.
I don't know what you were using but it is like that:
* On Windows you either choose "New spreadsheet" from quicklaunch menu (one in system tray). Or choose "OpenOffice.org Calc" from Start Menu.
* On Linux it is basically the same - you choose your app from menu or from system tray (but tray option is only limited to KDE, under GNOME you just can have buttons or drawer on panel).
I don't know about Mac builds but AFAIK OOo is not ready for Mac yet. Probably not to many people using OOo on Mac.:\ Too bad because I find it very good piece of software, once you get how it works it is really powerfull.
OK. Actually my point was that it is not more difficult than on Windows - it is just different (but for somebody who does not knows Windows nor Linux it will be the same). On Windows you need to install software to play DVDs and some media types (WMP does not play everything). On Linux well, you need to install software. It is the same thing.
> Can Linspire play DVDs? Why, yes. It can play > DVD's. What's more, the Linsoire DVD player is > Xine. Some how, little Linspire has managed to > figure out how to legally play MP3's and DVD's.
So? It is exactly as I've said - you need to pay for it. They bought paid licenses for DVD support and distribute closed/propertiary version. And you need to pay for it. So what exactly is your point?
> I generally think Suse is one of the most > polished distros out there, but it still has a > way to go with multimedia, to get it to appeal > to joe-computer user and Grandma who are scared > of "breaking" things on the computer.
They removed some multimedia support (DVD, MP3? I think it is about it) from some *reasons* not just because they cannot make it right. These reasons are legal difficulties - namely MP3 codec distribution issues (it is not free, when you distribute more than 100000 copies you need to pay Philips AFAIK) and DVD-CSS issues (I think it is illegal in US). SuSE is now US based (Novell) and they need to be legal. I belive only free (as in beer) version is crippled without multimedia. If you actually *buy* boxed set it should play MP3 and so on (I don't know how with DVD-CSS but they just could attach some propertiary program to play DVDs). So if you wish to pay you will get paid multimedia features, if you wish not to pay you don't and need to get it running on your own (which is perfectly legal - it just cannot be distributed this way).
So it is not like Linux distributors don't want to distribute this stuff - they cannot.
> Linux is on the cusp from going from "hacker" OS > to main-stream, but still has some catching up > to Windows in certain things - mainly multimedia.
I use Linux on daily basis as my workstation and never had any problems (well actually there were some like 5 years ago - now it is close to perfect) with multimedia. Mplayer plays just about any file format you can imagine - I often find Windows Media Player to not play some files, mplayer does it all out-of-the-box - no problems with searching for codecs etc. with proper setup you just click on file and it plays - I don't have any problems with multimedia and Linux. There are some areas that Linux is lacking, but IMHO it is not multimedia...
My distro of choice is Fedora - it also comes without some multimedia support - but adding it is as simple as adding one line to config file and issuing one command. For grandpa or smth. it is a matter of opening terminal and copying and pasting one command. And then it works so please don't dramatize. Or go get boxed paid distribution and you will get it all out-of-the-box.
> Yes I know there are plenty of programs that > work great - but the average user, I think, > would not have the expertise to get it to work > easily right off the DVD.
Look it is like installing one program and running it and you got DVD running. It is exactly the same as on Windows (does Windows Media Player play DVDs?). Actually I usually recommend anyone using Windows to install VLC Media Player - from my experience it works best. It is like somebody IMs or calls me and asks "look I've got this AVI file from my mail and I click it and it does not play - what should I do?" and I just point them to website or give them setup.exe URL and it works for them, where Windows Media Player does not. And VLC is aviable on Linux too.
> A system which I can easily reinstall, unlike > the personal data which, while it should be > backed up,
But you *do* have the backups right?
> can't be relied on to be backed up every > minute and shouldn't be accessed by someone > else regardless.
If your work is worth of it - you should backup it every minute. It is just a matter of priorities...
> Root makes sense on a multi-user system from > a sysadmin's point of view where the integrity > of the system is paramount.
Not only, single user systems also benefit from separation of privileges, we have already been there with Windows 9x.
> A single user in his home has different > priorities - his personal data is paramount -
So she/he should back it up as often as it is possible.
(...)
> And having 2 accounts
No - you only have one account, the other (root) is special.
> and having to have a 'whoami' command actually > *introduces* confusion.
OK it may be confusing - what is other way you suggest?
> I've got two very different prompts now with > a bright red YOU ARE ROOT but, in my early days, > I issued countless commands thinking I was me > when I'd left an xterm up as root or forgotten > which virtual console I was on.
On your *own* machine that nobody else can access it does not matter.
> And it tends to produce a "let's try this - I'm > a regular user and nothing can go *really* > wrong" attitude. In other words, you can catch > yourself becoming *sloppier* as a regular user, > which is actually bound to *carry over* as root.
But you *do* have backups?
Look nothing is more valuable than frequent backups - and that is it - main hyigene of working with data. No OS will save you from f.e. fire and damaging your hardware - if data is important *backup* it.
> Lastly, 'root' has horrible granularity.
> But I still run my Linux system as Joe User. > Just saying.
Really. They just got some good press. And it is better to have good press worldwide that to have some teen own you $0,5M which he probably would never pay to them at all...
> Why not let Dropline do all the work... so don't > fret slackware users you still have GNOME. Just > not being packaged by Slackware officially.
Yes and that is exactlu the case? Non official means f.e. that Slackware package base will not be tested against Dropline package base. That means if they release a patch package for Slackware and it actually breaks Dropline GNOME (since it was not tested against it) they don't give damn about it. Because it is said it is unofficial. So that means anything breaks in Dropline GNOME don't whine to Slackware developers since they don't care about GNOME. For me it is obvious that this is somewhat flawed. Any major distro does not have problem with shipping packaged GNOME, Slackware does because what? Because it is difficult to install?
> please write programs independant of GNOME *and* > KDE. both Qt and Gtk are perfectly fine libraries > by themselves, without the additional bloat! Isn't it maybe so that developers *benefit* from writing their applications against some popular desktop? After all they could just write their own toolkit for their own applications from scratch. After all they could just write their own libraries for their own applications from scratch. But the fact that they already have something to choose from makes it easier to write appliaction?
With KDE their kapplication can integrate nicely to *their* *shell* of *choice*. They can use existing set of libraries that do various stuff. Also with GNOME they can choose from nice things like accessibility framework etc.
Let me explain. This is not about this stupid debate which (KDE vs. GNOME) is better etc. After all it is about user experience. With Slackware now this experience is a bit worse. Of course there is Dropline (standing still at GNOME 2.8 which now is 2.10 that is stable and 2.10 *has* improvements over 2.8). Of course you can grab GNOME and compile manually. Of course you can get GNOME on Slackware in various ways - the point is right now you don't have it nicely packaged with your distro of choice - you must go third-party and it is always a flaw for the distro if it lags packages. Not the other way.
Keep in mind that you could not use GNOME as your DE but GNOME is not only DE - it is a set of applications and libraries and so on. So you actually may find GNOME sucking but you may find one or two GNOME applications actually usefull - but still you won't find them in GNOME.
Go look at http://gnomefiles.com/ site. It is big set of useful applications. That from now aren't so easy to install/use on Slackware.
Of course you can dish them all and say "stupid GNOME stuff etc." but pleas keep in mind that there are some programs in GNOME that many people (but not you) may find useful. Like Evolution or gThumb...
To be clear - I am not GNOME or Slackware user. I use Fedora with wmaker and set of cross-DE (ranging from GTK, Qt, KDE, GNOME, XFCE and whatever i like, does the job for me) applications that I like - with Fedora I have broader choice of applications to use. Peroid.
Maybe it will be moved to Fedora Extras section. But still it means that XFCE is not supported by Fedora. There is nothing really supported in Fedora but it is a test bed for RHEL. So if XFCE would last in Fedora it had a chance to get into RHEL. It is not a good move IMHO - XFCE is great light desktop especially for terminals over network and embeded stuff.
Also you can always grab XFCE from their download site as it comes nicely packaged for Fedora. But this discussion is about what does particular distro ship by default/tested/supported.
Most unix/linux programs call lpr for printing. You just feed the lpr program with file to print (f.e. from stdin like this "echo foo | lpr") and lpr handles that file to spooler.
So if you need multiple copies you need to change the printing command from fe:/usr/bin/lpr
to:/usr/bin/lpr -# 2 (for 2 copies, other numbers analogicaly)
> You must manually include it in your menu. > It should at least hit the majors (GNOME, KDE).
It does when you install it with RPM. But you are right - the installer could just copy these *.desktop files to/usr/share/applications or something...
xpdf - acroread is much faster (rendering) and xpdf is ugly as hell and almost not usable (try printing something with this ancient shit)...
ggv/kpdf and other ghostscript based - they are fine for postscript but fail much to more times on PDF files, they simply do not open all PDF files that disqualifies them for me...
acroread 5 - version 7 is faster and more usable...
So actually Acrobat Reader 7.0 for Linux is the best choice, and as for bloat (in size) I installed it via tarball, deleted loads of shit - all plugins - I don't need them. I just need acroread to display and print PDF files, nothing more. Also I deleted some help/sample files. Compressed acroread binary with upx and what I get is:
% du -hs/opt/acrobat7 36M/opt/acrobat7
Not so bad at all... Given that acroread loads almost instantly on my machine (and my machine is not a rocket certainly), renders fast and Just-Works.
Very good job Adobe...
But it has some bug. I hope they will iron them out (yes I've submitted them to their beta program bug tracking database).
Slashdot Mirror
> Fedora's print config utility worked great for
> all my printers. It took about 3 or 4 clicks and
> I was done.
I also use Fedora and I know this tool but I tend not to use it and configure my printers manually via cups config files.
But ESR is kind of right with this dialog (but not with CUPS as CUPS is not the issue). I mean it adds locally connected printers just fine. But it is problematic when you wish to share a printer - you need to know all the terminology (SMB, IPP, LPD etc.) and bit of networking. So average grandma would fail on this tool.
> Oh I am not blaming cups for it except it would
> be nice if they had included the PPD. I did not
> buy the printer it is our office network
> printer. The problem how many printers come with
> "Linux" stickers on them?
I don't know how many. This one that I've bought yesterday has in fact a big sticker saying "Works with Windows, Mac OS X and variety of Linux system" sticked on front.
> Yea I can look it up and hope that the info is
> up to date but it would be nice if they came
> with Linux drivers on the cd.
Yes but I don't find it really to be a problem - usually when you buy some hardware you investigate prior, read reviews and such to have an insight on what is aviable and make a proper choice. If you intrested in printers for Linux use you just can go to this site:
http://linuxprinting.org/suggested.html
And you will find variety of devices ranging from home to big monsters working with Linux.
PPD is PPD - it is not Windows nor Linux nor any other system. It is quite standard.
To be honest it is Xerox flaw, with HP you get PPD files on CDs in separate directories. Also just today I've purchased Samsung LCP-500 which is cheap semi professional color laser printer. The printer came with CD and Linux drivers. So it is due to vendor to support drivers.
Look nobody will buy unsupported printer in order to use it with Linux - this is quite normal. Also nobody claims that every plastic-crappy-printer-bought-in-supermarket will work with Linux.
Well but this argument is not over CUPS itself - CUPS is just printing engine - it can have multiple frontends like MOX's one (good), Fedora's one (apparently bad), Mandrivas one, SuSE's one etc. you can even go to /etc/cups/ and use your $EDITOR and it will be fine. CUPS is not about config GUI - it is about few config files than you can edit and config files themselves are quite OK for me.
;)
It is the same like you would say that Apache is not friendly because some distros GUI sucks... It is not the point about Apache but about this one distro tools. I know printing is more desktop oriented but it still applies here - with CUPS you can do a lot of magic (setting queues, browsing protocol, print accounting etc.) - no GUI IMHO will ever implement control of everything that CUPS can do. Either no GUI will ever implement control of everything that Apache can do...
It is not about CUPS - look at Apple guys, they did it well and they are still on CUPS.
PS. But the web interface could be a little prettier than it is now.
It has little to do with CUPS itself. It is rather Fedora's system-config-printer-gui fault. Go check out other distributions - namely SuSE or Mandriva (former Mandrake) - each of them handles this by their own tool - YaST (SuSE) and Mandriva Control Center... Go, see how it looks and think again not to generalize stupid stuff like:
Fedora's printer config dialog sucks -> Linux printing status: unfriendly.
> the OO.org 2.0 beta has so far required non-RPM
> Linux users (or those who want to have a single-
> user installation of the beta version) to build
> from source
No it has not. You could build from source but in fact you just could unpack RPMS and copy files to their locations - and it would probably work (I don't know which obscure Linux distro you was using). Also most Linux distros worth using has something like developement versions - so you simply grab packages from developement tree. It is where beta versions grow up.
So building from source was not *required* nor even recommended.
(...)
> I was recently looking at open source projects
> that I might contribute to, and-- in my case at
> least --OO.org was counted out on the basis of
> build complexity.
You can contribute on loads of other ways than coding. Your entire argument is based on claim that you need to compile it due to test it - this is not true so your whole argument is false.
(...)
> The solution? Simlplify the build process for
> the casual coder.
Here you are probably right. It is something that OOo devs mentioned in interviews and such. They are already working on that - but this requires time. It is large codebase so it is not easy to change it all.
> I imagine that many users find it particularly
:\ Too bad because I find it very good piece of software, once you get how it works it is really powerfull.
> annoying that if they want to, say, create a new
> spreadsheet, they must launch OO.o, which puts
> them in Writer, then go to File->New Spreadsheet
> in order to get to Calc.
I don't know what you were using but it is like that:
* On Windows you either choose "New spreadsheet" from quicklaunch menu (one in system tray). Or choose "OpenOffice.org Calc" from Start Menu.
* On Linux it is basically the same - you choose your app from menu or from system tray (but tray option is only limited to KDE, under GNOME you just can have buttons or drawer on panel).
I don't know about Mac builds but AFAIK OOo is not ready for Mac yet. Probably not to many people using OOo on Mac.
OK. Actually my point was that it is not more difficult than on Windows - it is just different (but for somebody who does not knows Windows nor Linux it will be the same). On Windows you need to install software to play DVDs and some media types (WMP does not play everything). On Linux well, you need to install software. It is the same thing.
> Can Linspire play DVDs? Why, yes. It can play
> DVD's. What's more, the Linsoire DVD player is
> Xine. Some how, little Linspire has managed to
> figure out how to legally play MP3's and DVD's.
So? It is exactly as I've said - you need to pay for it. They bought paid licenses for DVD support and distribute closed/propertiary version. And you need to pay for it. So what exactly is your point?
> Windows media player will not play
> DVDs out of the box.
So this is exactly like with SuSE - you need to perform additional steps to watch DVD - namely install software.
> I generally think Suse is one of the most
> polished distros out there, but it still has a
> way to go with multimedia, to get it to appeal
> to joe-computer user and Grandma who are scared
> of "breaking" things on the computer.
They removed some multimedia support (DVD, MP3? I think it is about it) from some *reasons* not just because they cannot make it right. These reasons are legal difficulties - namely MP3 codec distribution issues (it is not free, when you distribute more than 100000 copies you need to pay Philips AFAIK) and DVD-CSS issues (I think it is illegal in US). SuSE is now US based (Novell) and they need to be legal. I belive only free (as in beer) version is crippled without multimedia. If you actually *buy* boxed set it should play MP3 and so on (I don't know how with DVD-CSS but they just could attach some propertiary program to play DVDs). So if you wish to pay you will get paid multimedia features, if you wish not to pay you don't and need to get it running on your own (which is perfectly legal - it just cannot be distributed this way).
So it is not like Linux distributors don't want to distribute this stuff - they cannot.
> Linux is on the cusp from going from "hacker" OS
> to main-stream, but still has some catching up
> to Windows in certain things - mainly multimedia.
I use Linux on daily basis as my workstation and never had any problems (well actually there were some like 5 years ago - now it is close to perfect) with multimedia. Mplayer plays just about any file format you can imagine - I often find Windows Media Player to not play some files, mplayer does it all out-of-the-box - no problems with searching for codecs etc. with proper setup you just click on file and it plays - I don't have any problems with multimedia and Linux. There are some areas that Linux is lacking, but IMHO it is not multimedia...
My distro of choice is Fedora - it also comes without some multimedia support - but adding it is as simple as adding one line to config file and issuing one command. For grandpa or smth. it is a matter of opening terminal and copying and pasting
one command. And then it works so please don't dramatize. Or go get boxed paid distribution and you will get it all out-of-the-box.
> Yes I know there are plenty of programs that
> work great - but the average user, I think,
> would not have the expertise to get it to work
> easily right off the DVD.
Look it is like installing one program and running it and you got DVD running. It is exactly the same as on Windows (does Windows Media Player play DVDs?). Actually I usually recommend anyone using Windows to install VLC Media Player - from my experience it works best. It is like somebody IMs or calls me and asks "look I've got this AVI file from my mail and I click it and it does not play - what should I do?" and I just point them to website or give them setup.exe URL and it works for them, where Windows Media Player does not. And VLC is aviable on Linux too.
> A system which I can easily reinstall, unlike
> the personal data which, while it should be
> backed up,
But you *do* have the backups right?
> can't be relied on to be backed up every
> minute and shouldn't be accessed by someone
> else regardless.
If your work is worth of it - you should backup it every minute. It is just a matter of priorities...
> Root makes sense on a multi-user system from
> a sysadmin's point of view where the integrity
> of the system is paramount.
Not only, single user systems also benefit from separation of privileges, we have already been there with Windows 9x.
> A single user in his home has different
> priorities - his personal data is paramount -
So she/he should back it up as often as it is possible.
(...)
> And having 2 accounts
No - you only have one account, the other (root) is special.
> and having to have a 'whoami' command actually
> *introduces* confusion.
OK it may be confusing - what is other way you suggest?
> I've got two very different prompts now with
> a bright red YOU ARE ROOT but, in my early days,
> I issued countless commands thinking I was me
> when I'd left an xterm up as root or forgotten
> which virtual console I was on.
On your *own* machine that nobody else can access it does not matter.
> And it tends to produce a "let's try this - I'm
> a regular user and nothing can go *really*
> wrong" attitude. In other words, you can catch
> yourself becoming *sloppier* as a regular user,
> which is actually bound to *carry over* as root.
But you *do* have backups?
Look nothing is more valuable than frequent backups - and that is it - main hyigene of working with data. No OS will save you from f.e. fire and damaging your hardware - if data is important *backup* it.
> Lastly, 'root' has horrible granularity.
> But I still run my Linux system as Joe User.
> Just saying.
It was moved to Fedora Extras:
n ux /extras/development/SRPMS/
http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/li
You can do network instalation if you wish. It will save you trouble of burning CDs.
What version of FF are you using? I am on 1.0.2 here (supplied by Fedora) and I don't see this option. Should I create such key or smth.?
Really. They just got some good press. And it is better to have good press worldwide that to have some teen own you $0,5M which he probably would never pay to them at all...
Bit Off-topic. Have look at privoxy - http://www.privoxy.org/ - if you like mess with HTTP messages you send... :)
> Why not let Dropline do all the work... so don't
> fret slackware users you still have GNOME. Just
> not being packaged by Slackware officially.
Yes and that is exactlu the case? Non official means f.e. that Slackware package base will not be tested against Dropline package base. That means if they release a patch package for Slackware and it actually breaks Dropline GNOME (since it was not tested against it) they don't give damn about it. Because it is said it is unofficial. So that means anything breaks in Dropline GNOME don't whine to Slackware developers since they don't care about GNOME. For me it is obvious that this is somewhat flawed. Any major distro does not have problem with shipping packaged GNOME, Slackware does because what? Because it is difficult to install?
> please write programs independant of GNOME *and*
> KDE. both Qt and Gtk are perfectly fine libraries
> by themselves, without the additional bloat!
Isn't it maybe so that developers *benefit* from writing their applications against some popular desktop? After all they could just write their own toolkit for their own applications from scratch. After all they could just write their own libraries for their own applications from scratch. But the fact that they already have something to choose from makes it easier to write appliaction?
With KDE their kapplication can integrate nicely to *their* *shell* of *choice*. They can use existing set of libraries that do various stuff. Also with GNOME they can choose from nice things like accessibility framework etc.
Let me explain. This is not about this stupid debate which (KDE vs. GNOME) is better etc. After all it is about user experience. With Slackware now this experience is a bit worse. Of course there is Dropline (standing still at GNOME 2.8 which now is 2.10 that is stable and 2.10 *has* improvements over 2.8). Of course you can grab GNOME and compile manually. Of course you can get GNOME on Slackware in various ways - the point is right now you don't have it nicely packaged with your distro of choice - you must go third-party and it is always a flaw for the distro if it lags packages. Not the other way.
Keep in mind that you could not use GNOME as your DE but GNOME is not only DE - it is a set of applications and libraries and so on. So you actually may find GNOME sucking but you may find one or two GNOME applications actually usefull - but still you won't find them in GNOME.
Go look at http://gnomefiles.com/ site. It is big set of useful applications. That from now aren't so easy to install/use on Slackware.
Of course you can dish them all and say "stupid GNOME stuff etc." but pleas keep in mind that there are some programs in GNOME that many people (but not you) may find useful. Like Evolution or gThumb...
To be clear - I am not GNOME or Slackware user. I use Fedora with wmaker and set of cross-DE (ranging from GTK, Qt, KDE, GNOME, XFCE and whatever i like, does the job for me) applications that I like - with Fedora I have broader choice of applications to use. Peroid.
Just FYI - if you look at FC4/Fedora developement tree you now won't find XFCE in there...
n ux /core/development/SRPMS/
http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/li
Maybe it will be moved to Fedora Extras section. But still it means that XFCE is not supported by Fedora. There is nothing really supported in Fedora but it is a test bed for RHEL. So if XFCE would last in Fedora it had a chance to get into RHEL. It is not a good move IMHO - XFCE is great light desktop especially for terminals over network and embeded stuff.
Also you can always grab XFCE from their download site as it comes nicely packaged for Fedora. But this discussion is about what does particular distro ship by default/tested/supported.
> Wrong. kpdf is xpdf based. You're thinking of
> kghostview for the postscript viewer.
You are probably right... I don't use KDE (or GNOME).
(...)
> I'd recommend that you reassess your statements
> about kpdf before proceeding.
Yes. But it (xpdf so kpdf also) is slow and has problems (fails to open) with some documents...
Multiple copies.
/usr/bin/lpr
/usr/bin/lpr -# 2
:P
Most unix/linux programs call lpr for printing. You just feed the lpr program with file to print (f.e. from stdin like this "echo foo | lpr") and lpr handles that file to spooler.
So if you need multiple copies you need to change the printing command from fe:
to:
(for 2 copies, other numbers analogicaly)
So you probably need to read lpr MANUAL.
> You must manually include it in your menu.
/usr/share/applications or something...
> It should at least hit the majors (GNOME, KDE).
It does when you install it with RPM. But you are right - the installer could just copy these *.desktop files to
Actually it is quite fast. Compared to f.e.:
/opt/acrobat7 /opt/acrobat7
xpdf - acroread is much faster (rendering) and xpdf is ugly as hell and almost not usable (try printing something with this ancient shit)...
ggv/kpdf and other ghostscript based - they are fine for postscript but fail much to more times on PDF files, they simply do not open all PDF files that disqualifies them for me...
acroread 5 - version 7 is faster and more usable...
So actually Acrobat Reader 7.0 for Linux is the best choice, and as for bloat (in size) I installed it via tarball, deleted loads of shit - all plugins - I don't need them. I just need acroread to display and print PDF files, nothing more. Also I deleted some help/sample files. Compressed acroread binary with upx and what I get is:
% du -hs
36M
Not so bad at all... Given that acroread loads almost instantly on my machine (and my machine is not a rocket certainly), renders fast and Just-Works.
Very good job Adobe...
But it has some bug. I hope they will iron them out (yes I've submitted them to their beta program bug tracking database).