moen_on_gnome

This is part of The Pile, a partial archive of some open source mailing lists and newsgroups.



To: svlug@svlug.org

Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 12:00:08 -0700
From: Rick Moen <rick@linuxmafia.com>
Subject: Re: [svlug] KDE and GNOME

begin  David E. Fox quotation:

>> Coincidence, or is the intended message that one should install
>> everything?
> 
> If it's intended to be part of the Gnome application set, it's pretty
> much implied that it should need Gnome to run as the underlying
> desktop. Gnucash can run standalone (as long as you have the necessary
> libraries), and it doesn't really depend on Gnome per se, but
> nevertheless it's touted as a Gnome app, not a GTK/whatever else app.

Here is the heart of my contention, on that matter:  Many applications
that are portrayed as "GNOME" applications are really just GTK ones that 
have been unnecessarily and avoidably been made made dependent on other
GNOME components.

When the matter is raised with them, the GNOME guys give somewhat
incoherent justifications, and the Helixcode guys specifically seem to
feel it's A Good Thing because it encourages installing the kitchen sink
and thus bringing about a "standard desktop".

The computer press doesn't help at all, in as much as they can't even
grasp the concept of window managers, let alone understand why choice, 
diversity, and simplicity are desirable.

===

Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 17:15:25 -0700
From: Aaron Lehmann <aaronl@vitelus.com>
To: J C Lawrence <claw@kanga.nu>
Cc: svlug@svlug.org
Subject: Re: [svlug] KDE and GNOME


--vkogqOf2sHV7VnPd
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 12:51:30PM -0700, J C Lawrence wrote:
> Stupid example:
>=20
>   gnapster pulls in most of the Gnome universe.

Wrong. Check out version 1.4.0 and configure it with --disable-gnome.
I spent a long time porting it away from Gnome, so I hope it's
understandable that I try to keep this misconception from propagating.

===


Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 11:01:36 -0800
To: svlug@svlug.org
Subject: Re: [svlug] KDE and GNOME
From: Rick Moen <rick@linuxmafia.com>

begin  David E. Fox quotation:

> But gnapster happily runs under KDE.

There's really no such thing as "running under KDE".  Check your ps
output, when you're "running KDE", and you'll notice that you're
probably running the kwm window manager and an odd assortment of
utilities.  

So, why should there even be _any question_ of whether some foo X client
will run "under" this setup?  kwm is just another window manager, and
gnapster is just another X client.  You can run gnapster if your system
satisfies its dependencies.  You can't run gnapster if your system
doesn't satisfy its dependencies.  It's entirely irrelevant which window
manager and (in some cases) flotilla of utilities are default-loaded at
that time.

My point is that this whole notion of "running GNOME" and "running KDE"
is illusory:  It's a marketing notion with almost no connection to the
underlying reality.

Equally, it's somewhat nonsensical to speak of choosing between GNOME
and KDE, or preferring one over the other.  Each is just a collection of
X clients, some hinting tricks for window managers, a CORBA broker, and
a few extra inter-process gimmicks.  The smart thing to do is to pick
the X clients you like from each, and run them if it suits you without
particular regard for their "desktop" affiliations.[1]

The people who are stuck with choosing between "desktops" are those who
lack the initiative to edit their .xinitrc files.  To them, GNOME and
KDE seem to be monolithic "desktop" systems, because they're helpless to
customise their operating environments, and obliged to accept some
"desktop" packager's defaults.

But _we_ don't have to adopt the brain-damaged terminology that results
from that state of helplessness, do we?

[1] Quibbles about "desktop" component architectures and clipboard
enhancements are hereby duly acknowledged in advance.  But my point
stands.

===

Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 12:44:12 -0800
From: Rick Moen <rick@linuxmafia.com>
To: svlug@svlug.org
Subject: Re: [svlug] KDE and GNOME

begin  J C Lawrence quotation:
 
> The main connection is that defined by things like drag'n'drop
> "standards", and other inter-app IPC/RPC forms.  AFAICT that's what
> really defines "Gnome" and "KDE".  

That would, in fact, be the footnoted "quibble" my post cited.

===

Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 19:07:04 -0800
From: Rick Moen <rick@linuxmafia.com>
To: svlug@svlug.org
Subject: Re: [svlug] KDE and GNOME

begin  Marc MERLIN quotation:
 
> This is 99% true.
> When I run kwintv under gnome (whatever version comes with RH 6.2),
> gnome tells me after I've run the app for a minute or so "No response
> to the SaveYourself command. The program may be slow, stopped or
> broken. You may wait for it to respond or remove it" (not even a
> cancel/forget it button!!!) I'm forced to minimize the dialog box and
> ignore it
> 
> That definitely very poor design in gnome, and it's proof that yes,
> gnome can be a pain in the ass if you run a (I'm supposing specific)
> kde app.

But does this mean the concept of "running GNOME" has (even) a 1%
foundation in reality, or this more fruitfully seen as broken and
obnoxious behaviour by some GNOME utility (probably a session manager)?
I'd be tempted to say the latter -- especially since I'll bet the
offending utility could be found and silenced (or vapourised) without
much trouble.


===


the rest of The Pile (a partial mailing list archive)

doom@kzsu.stanford.edu