James H. Newman wrote:
> My question is, what do these three projects provide that one
> can't get by just building the monster from scratch with garnome? Is it
> just a matter of eye candy, or is there more to it?
>

Probably just the fact that most people don't want to build the monster
from scratch.

On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 00:41:45 +0000, Melissa wrote:

> James H. Newman wrote:
>> My question is, what do these three projects provide that one
>> can't get by just building the monster from scratch with garnome? Is it
>> just a matter of eye candy, or is there more to it?
>>
>>
> Probably just the fact that most people don't want to build the monster
> from scratch.

So you don't know, right?

On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 13:35:27 +0000, James H. Newman wrote:

> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 00:41:45 +0000, Melissa wrote:
>
>> James H. Newman wrote:
>>> My question is, what do these three projects provide that one
>>> can't get by just building the monster from scratch with garnome? Is
>>> it just a matter of eye candy, or is there more to it?
>>>
>>>
>> Probably just the fact that most people don't want to build the monster
>> from scratch.
>
> So you don't know, right?

Ah, this is a couple of questions I'm able to answer to:

1: I don't know if Melissa does or doesn't know.
2: I don't know if it is right.

On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 19:59:43 +0000, James H. Newman wrote:


> My question is, what do these three projects provide that one
> can't get by just building the monster from scratch with garnome? Is it
> just a matter of eye candy, or is there more to it?


If you like corporate branding or whatever particular feel they each have
to offer, go wth one of the three. Dropline does not mess with slack that
much anymore, apparently.

How's my driving?

--
Kind Regards,
B.Hoffmann

"James H. Newman" (NewJames@exicite.com) writes:
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 00:41:45 +0000, Melissa wrote:
>
>> James H. Newman wrote:
>>> My question is, what do these three projects provide that one
>>> can't get by just building the monster from scratch with garnome? Is it
>>> just a matter of eye candy, or is there more to it?
>>>
>>>
>> Probably just the fact that most people don't want to build the monster
>> from scratch.
>
> So you don't know, right?
>
>
But it's a valid response. Real or not, there is at the very least
an imagined difficulty in compiling Gnome from scratch. Note that
it's no longer included in Slackware because of this trouble compiling
it, and if Patrick has problems with it, that might be indicative
of the truth.

It actually doesn't matter whether or not there is real difficulty
in compiling Gnome from scratch, the belief is strong enough that
few will likely try it.

Hence people will drop Gnome now that Slackware is no longer including
it (or move to another distribution) rather than try to compile it.
Or, they will use a third party compile.

Michael

James H. Newman wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 00:41:45 +0000, Melissa wrote:
>
>> James H. Newman wrote:
>>> My question is, what do these three projects provide that one
>>> can't get by just building the monster from scratch with garnome? Is it
>>> just a matter of eye candy, or is there more to it?
>>>
>>>
>> Probably just the fact that most people don't want to build the monster
>> from scratch.
>
> So you don't know, right?
>

In that I am not psychic and cannot guarentee you the inner workings of
the entire world, no, I don't know. But if that's the sort of answer you
are looking for, this is entirely the wrong place to look for it. Might
I suggest alt.paranormal for such inquiries?

In that I've given you a plausible reason why people don't want to touch
Gnome with a 10 foot pole, yeah, I do know. That PV has dropped Gnome over
its cumbersome nature with such a verbose message as was left in the
Changelog has left a lasting impression upon a certain group that Gnome is
just not worth the trouble.

Melissa trolled:

> In that I am not psychic and cannot guarentee you the inner
> workings of the entire world, no, I don't know.

You can't? You don't? Well then, we just have to ask you this:
what use are you? What do you contribute to this group? We expect
nothing less or more from you than a woman's intuitive contribution
and without that, what do you have to offer?

> But if that's the sort of answer you are looking for, this is
> entirely the wrong place to look for it. Might I suggest
> alt.paranormal for such inquiries?

If he posts to that group, would you be able to give him an answer?
Should those of many of us who look forward to your edifying
repartee crosspost to the alt.paranormal ng?

> In that I've given you a plausible reason why people don't want to
> touch Gnome with a 10 foot pole, yeah, I do know. That PV has
> dropped Gnome over its cumbersome nature with such a verbose
> message as was left in the Changelog has left a lasting impression
> upon a certain group that Gnome is just not worth the trouble.

Ah, PV is God. Some of us are aetheists and others are agnostic,
however, and bowing and scraping before "Pat" is not consistent with
our self-respect.

Gnome and KDE are both doomed. All you need to run the necessary
linux gui software is a plain windowmanager and if you need anything
fancier than that, you are better off to dual-boot.

cordially, as always,

rm

On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 22:00:27 +0000, Melissa wrote:

> James H. Newman wrote:
>> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 00:41:45 +0000, Melissa wrote:
>>
>>> James H. Newman wrote:
>>>> My question is, what do these three projects provide that one
>>>> can't get by just building the monster from scratch with garnome? Is
>>>> it just a matter of eye candy, or is there more to it?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Probably just the fact that most people don't want to build the
>>> monster from scratch.
>>
>> So you don't know, right?
>>
>>
> In that I am not psychic and cannot guarentee you the inner workings of
> the entire world, no, I don't know. But if that's the sort of answer you
> are looking for, this is entirely the wrong place to look for it.

I am looking for something a bit more objective than a personal
opinion, which is all you gave as a reply to two specific questions.

James H. Newman wrote:
> I have noticed that out of the three big Gnome-for-Slackware
> players, one (Freerock) seems to be dead; another (Gware) is for the most
> part consistently behind both in Slackware and Gnome releases; and the
> last one (Dropline) messes with Slackware big time, plus it seems to have
> a number of issues with Slackware 11 (mine certainly does, and I have not
> monkeyed with it.)
>
> My question is, what do these three projects provide that one
> can't get by just building the monster from scratch with garnome? Is it
> just a matter of eye candy, or is there more to it?

I'd ask them directly. People on CLL (excluding those working on said
projects) have no idea (but we can speculate if requested).

My guess is
a) Non-Gentoo people tend to not like compiling huge, complicated
packages (e.g. gnome); somebody needs to release packages.
b) Stock gnome probably required tweaks and other packages to work on
non-redhat-like systems. Garnome isn't qualified to figure all this
out, so these projects have some porting to do.
c) There are different approaches to getting gnome working on Slackware;
thus the different projects. Dropline chose to "fix Slackware";
Freerock chose to "fix gnome"... Don't know much about Gware.
d) Of the linux users running Slackware, few are interested in gnome -->
there aren't many people willing to maintain gnome on slack.

- Daniel

On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 13:35:27 +0000, James H. Newman wrote:

> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 00:41:45 +0000, Melissa wrote:
>
>> James H. Newman wrote:
>>> My question is, what do these three projects provide that one
>>> can't get by just building the monster from scratch with garnome? Is it
>>> just a matter of eye candy, or is there more to it?
>>>
>>>
>> Probably just the fact that most people don't want to build the monster
>> from scratch.
>
> So you don't know, right?

Yeah, you got that right, James. I guess you wasted your time posting
your question. Oops, I didn't mean that it's a guess. You definitely
wasted your time posting that question here. Yeah, I'm sure of it.
Certainly. No doubt, none at all.

--
Chick Tower

For e-mail: aols . sent . towerboy AT xoxy . net

On 2007-06-22, James H. Newman wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 22:00:27 +0000, Melissa wrote:
>
>> James H. Newman wrote:
>>> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 00:41:45 +0000, Melissa wrote:
>>>
>>>> James H. Newman wrote:
>>>>> My question is, what do these three projects provide that one
>>>>> can't get by just building the monster from scratch with garnome? Is
>>>>> it just a matter of eye candy, or is there more to it?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Probably just the fact that most people don't want to build the
>>>> monster from scratch.
>>>
>>> So you don't know, right?
>>>
>>>
>> In that I am not psychic and cannot guarentee you the inner workings of
>> the entire world, no, I don't know. But if that's the sort of answer you
>> are looking for, this is entirely the wrong place to look for it.
>
> I am looking for something a bit more objective than a personal
> opinion, which is all you gave as a reply to two specific questions.


Suggestion #1: Go ask the people who make the gnome projects what they
have to offer over building garnome yourself.

Suggestion #2: Build garnome yourself. Then install one of the packaged
gnome projects and compare them. Repeat with the other prepackaged
gnome projects.

Suggestion #3: After completed one or both of the above, followup to this
thread so that next time someone asks the same (or similar) question,
they won't have to do as much work as you did.

As a side note, I suspect that after you get involved in suggestion #2
(assuming you go that route), you'll see that Melissa was correct after
all.

RW

On 20 Jun., 21:59, "James H. Newman" wrote:
> My question is, what do these three projects provide that one
> can't get by just building the monster from scratch with garnome? Is it
> just a matter of eye candy, or is there more to it?

I think the biggest difference is the support for Slackware. Dropline
is for Slackware, Garnome not. I have tried garnome myself many times
during the 2.14/2.16 releases of Gnome and it did never really work
for me. Earlier Dropline releases replaced some X11 packages which has
changed in the latest release.

But there is another Gnome Setup: GnomeSlacky. It's from the italien
slacky.eu group and provides an ISO image including packages for
Slackware 11.0 and Gnome 2.18.2. I haven't tried it myself (since i
have my own buildscript for Gnome) but i think it's worth a look.

DV

On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 19:14:42 +0000, DarkVision wrote:

> On 20 Jun., 21:59, "James H. Newman" wrote:
>> My question is, what do these three projects provide that one
>> can't get by just building the monster from scratch with garnome? Is it
>> just a matter of eye candy, or is there more to it?
>
> I think the biggest difference is the support for Slackware. Dropline is
> for Slackware, Garnome not. I have tried garnome myself many times
> during the 2.14/2.16 releases of Gnome and it did never really work for
> me. Earlier Dropline releases replaced some X11 packages which has
> changed in the latest release.
>
> But there is another Gnome Setup: GnomeSlacky. It's from the italien
> slacky.eu group and provides an ISO image including packages for
> Slackware 11.0 and Gnome 2.18.2. I haven't tried it myself (since i have
> my own buildscript for Gnome) but i think it's worth a look.

Thanks very much for the only piece of valuable information
contributed to this thread.

On Jun 21, 6:22 pm, mikemcclai...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Melissa trolled:
>
> > In that I am not psychic and cannot guarentee you the inner
> > workings of the entire world, no, I don't know.
>
> You can't? You don't? Well then, we just have to ask you this:
> what use are you? What do you contribute to this group? We expect
> nothing less or more from you than a woman's intuitive contribution
> and without that, what do you have to offer?
>
> > But if that's the sort of answer you are looking for, this is
> > entirely the wrong place to look for it. Might I suggest
> > alt.paranormal for such inquiries?
>
> If he posts to that group, would you be able to give him an answer?
> Should those of many of us who look forward to your edifying
> repartee crosspost to the alt.paranormal ng?
>
> > In that I've given you a plausible reason why people don't want to
> > touch Gnome with a 10 foot pole, yeah, I do know. That PV has
> > dropped Gnome over its cumbersome nature with such a verbose
> > message as was left in the Changelog has left a lasting impression
> > upon a certain group that Gnome is just not worth the trouble.
>
> Ah, PV is God. Some of us are aetheists and others are agnostic,
> however, and bowing and scraping before "Pat" is not consistent with
> our self-respect.
>
> Gnome and KDE are both doomed. All you need to run the necessary
> linux gui software is a plain windowmanager and if you need anything
> fancier than that, you are better off to dual-boot.
>
> cordially, as always,
>
> rm

I run applications on my computer. Most will not run without a GUI.
Some won't run without Gnome libraries. It is not a question of being
fancy---it is a question of what works. Gimp does not work from a
command line. Inkscape in addition requires Gnome-resident libraries.
Hence Slack 11 plus dropline.

PV no longer ships Gnome wiht Slack. It has stopped raining outside. I
ahve zero control over either event.

John C.
John C.