Story of GNOME and KDE...

**stryder144** · 01-02-2002, 08:31 PM

not at all my friend... all u need is to install KDE, then gnome-libs and u will be able to run gnome programs under KDE without having that entire waist of space some people refer to as Gnome on ur system. *this won't just work with any gnome-program though because GNOME programs are known for their shitloads of dependencies

*

Agreed. *Checkout gnomesword.sourceforge.net. *It needs several programs from the latest/greatest evolution/ximian gnome. *That stinks. *But, it looks better (imho) than the alternative, which would be at www.bibletime.de . *Oh, well. *Life goes on and I download what i need, when I need it.

01-02-2002, 08:36 PM

It needs several programs from the latest/greatest evolution/ximian gnome.

yea that's just terrible and unfortunately it's typical about gnome programs

someone once said:
"why should i use Gnome? when i install KDE it's 180MB's of good apps. when i install gnome the libraries alone are 180MB"
and i can't disagree with that

so in conclusion: fuck gnome, long live KDE

**ndogg** · 01-05-2002, 05:34 PM

Eazel didn't come to fight against Ximian, infact Ximian embraced Eazels Open Source file manager Nautilus in Gnomve 1.4 (as did the Gnome Foundation).

Actually, they did have a certain amount of animosity before Eazel went out of business, but they did a very good job of keeping it quiet. I had to do a little research to actually find this information out.
http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/opinions/3297/1/

**ndogg** · 01-05-2002, 05:50 PM

All languages are considerd by many to be poor languages to create a GUI inand yet all the KDE/Qt based companies cooperated more often than competed..

OO versions of languages (like C++) are considered to be slower than their iterative counterparts. This is pretty much true. However, for most modern desktop computers, the amount of overhead is barely noticeable.

The other argument is bloat. I say that bloat does not necessarily imply bad software.

Another argument is that C does better with binding to other languages. GNOME has GNORBA (based off CORBA) for IPC/RPC so that making bindings to various languages is easier. KDE uses DCOP for IPC/RPC for the purpose of performance. The KDE people decided that CORBA had too much overhead.

**stryder144** · 01-07-2002, 08:41 PM

yea that's just terrible and unfortunately it's typical about gnome programs

someone once said:
"why should i use Gnome? when i install KDE it's 180MB's of good apps. *when i install gnome the libraries alone are 180MB"
and i can't disagree with that

so in conclusion: fuck gnome, long live KDE

I am thinking about ditching KDE and Gnome and going with XFCE. Of course, I will still load all of the libraries, I just won't be compiling any of the extra programs I don't need. Of course, I will still need to wrestle with the dreaded god of dependencies, but that is required anyway.

**Feztaa** · 01-08-2002, 04:04 PM

8) XFCE 8)

It's actually fast, and it is a whole DE like KDE and Gnome...

01-09-2002, 06:07 AM

8) XFCE 8)

It's actually fast, and it is a whole DE like KDE and Gnome...

so is KDE if u compile it right

**Feztaa** · 01-09-2002, 08:52 PM

Yeah but XFCE is fast if you do a normal compile, so imagine how much faster it'd be with optimizations and objprelinking...

01-10-2002, 08:16 AM

Yeah but XFCE is fast if you do a normal compile, so imagine how much faster it'd be with optimizations and objprelinking...

if it's able to compile with objectprelinking... so far not a lot of programs are being compiled it with it (allthough, in theory it should be excellent for every c++ application)

so far, the only programs i've seen that can be compiled with objectprelinking are QT, KDE, Koffice and kxicq2
there's probably some more but i haven't seen it yet

**Feztaa** · 01-10-2002, 04:38 PM

Ah, thought it could be done with most things.

Speaking of objprelinking related stuff, I still have to fix the kernel on my LFS box and start the BLFS book