Re: [Cooker] Aurora - the devil's in the details
David Walser [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
david faure has begun to do some work in that area (in kde's cvs)
but the road is long before having interactive::qt;
and at that moment, we'll have to check either to use
interactive::qt or interactive::gtk :-)
the real problem will be that some tools directly use my_gtk...
Is that part of perl-MDK-Common?
urpmf is your friend, little jedi :-) :
tv@vador ~ $ urpmf my_gtk.pm
drakxtools:/usr/lib/libDrakX/my_gtk.pm
Guess you'll have to abstract my_gtk too. I'm assuming they use
my_gtk for things that appear only in the gtk version(s) and not the
newt version(s) :o)
yes, there's a few gtk only tools (logdrake, ...); and there's the mcc
which provides a short interactive ui and the full blessed my_gtk/ugtk
ui.
ugtk offers nice wrapper on top of perl_gtk, thus enabling powerful
creation of ui. mcc example:
my $window = new Gtk::Window -toplevel,
$window-add(
gtkpack_(new Gtk::VBox(0, 0),
0, my $title_w = get_main_menu($window),
0, my $fixed_title = gtkset_usize(new Gtk::Fixed, 400, 55),
0, new Gtk::HSeparator,
1, gtkpack_(new Gtk::HBox(0, 0),
0, my $fixed_left = new Gtk::Fixed,
1, gtkpack_(my $right_box = new Gtk::VBox(0, 0),
1, gtkpack_($emb_box = new Gtk::VBox(0, 0),
1, $emb_wait = gtkpack_(new Gtk::VBox(0, 0),
1, new Gtk::HBox(0, 0),
0, gtkpack_(new Gtk::HBox(0, 0),
1, new Gtk::VBox(0, 0),
0,
gtkadd(gtkset_shadow_type(new Gtk::Frame, 'etched_out'),
gtkpng_('hourglass'),
),
1, new Gtk::VBox(0, 0),
),
0, new Gtk::Label(_(Please
wait...)),
1, new Gtk::HBox(0, 0),
0,
gtkadd(gtkset_layout(gtkset_border_width(new Gtk::HButtonBox, 10), 'end'),
gtksignal_connect(new
Gtk::Button(_(Cancel)), clicked = sub { kill('USR1', $$) }),
)
)
),
1, new Gtk::Widget ('Gtk::Notebook',show_border = 0,
show_tabs = 0),
)
)
)
);
my_gtk offer high level functions (windows, ...) mainly used by interactive::gtk
Re: [Cooker] Aurora - the devil's in the details
On Fri, 16 Aug 2002 16:47, Chris Higgins wrote: Mandrake Linux is what I use on my desktop, I put redhat or debian on servers. I'm considering dropping Mandrake for my desktop - and let me take a second to explain why. Having read your reasoning, the idea of replacing Mandrake with RedHat is loopy, on a server or elsewhere. RedHat offer you less choices than Mandrake. Mandrake and SuSe, for example, _prefer_ KDE and so write most of their tools to it. RedHat essentially *requires* GNOME, militantly markets GNOME-alone. RedHat's dependency checking is also sloppier than Mandrake's. If I chose Debian over Mandrake on a server, I would do so because Debian's packaging is much more careful, and their update system more reliable to a more or less unbeatable degree. In point of fact, I do have a Debian gateway for my home (I replaced a Mandrake 6.0 (!) server with it) specifically to become more adept at using these tools. I have apt-get dist-upgraded Debian servers and had 100% of the services survive the experience - in part because the package scripting stops and asks if it's not sure - but with Mandrake something inevitably breaks. With RedHat, several things inevitably break. Having said that, Mandrake is (oh-so-)slowly becoming more proficient at sorting out dependency issues and the like in its RPMs, and the semi-automated RPM handling tools have caught up to Debian considerably and should - post 9.0 - stabilise rapidly. Mandrake seems to have a genius for picking good versions and variants of things. Very rarely do they release a distro and then immediately afterwards have a security issue to patch, and they were early adopters of successful systems and services such as postfix. Counterbalancing this, their system for netting all bug reports seems to have leaks - at least from a user's perspective - or perhaps there simply aren't enough people on the incoming end to deal with them all. I can't stand Aurora (personally) but I can quite happily accept that it is probably useful for some people out there. It should be fairly simple to dress up the current system to look more GUI-ish without detracting from its usefulness. What they have now is a better compromise than Aurora in that it is much more useful and understandable. What I would appreciate is the ability to start the system in three wise monkeys mode (progress bar only all the way, which is more than Windows gives you (some variants give you progress for a short leg of the boot) but not overwhelming or confusing for a newbie), and have a simple keystroke (maybe +/-) to turn on/off detail as required. A regularly updated set of advertising images would be a useful filler for the box in the middle. Later, a tool to allow the user to add their own image(s) and/or replace the existing set would be good. If progress-bar-only is regarded as detail level 0, and the current system is regarded as detail level 2, at a lower priority (maybe for 9.1) I'd like a `detail level 1' that consisted of packing the current `text' window with icons drawn early in the piece and overlaid with tick-questionmark-cross as each started, staggered (e.g. successful fdisk of a damaged partition) or failed. Given that functionality, I can't think of any reason to miss Aurora. Cheers; Leon
Re: [Cooker] Aurora - the devil's in the details
Leon Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Having read your reasoning, the idea of replacing Mandrake with RedHat is loopy, on a server or elsewhere. RedHat offer you less choices than Mandrake. Mandrake and SuSe, for example, _prefer_ KDE and so write most of their tools to it. RedHat essentially *requires* GNOME, militantly markets GNOME-alone. err, we don't prefer kde or gnome, all our stuff are made to works with both (unified menu through wm methods, common desktop icons, ...) as for our toos, they're not written for kde; in fact, they use gtk+ since: - libgtk+ is small (1.5Mb) while libqt is 6.6Mb - libgtk+ doesn't means have gnome libs installed which is not true for libqt - there's still no decent perl-Qt binding (but david faure is working on it) - we (mandrake developers) have better knowledge of gtk+ than qt - we already have a code base extending perl-Gtk to get a usable toolkit (my_gtk/ugtk) - we already have a code base providing abstraction in the config tools for implementation into Gtk, Newt and stdio (interactive) the rest of your post had have bad side effects on our ego :-)
Re: [Cooker] Aurora - the devil's in the details
--- Thierry Vignaud [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - we already have a code base providing abstraction in the config tools for implementation into Gtk, Newt and stdio (interactive) That's really cool. Have you all looked at Stormix's abstraction toolkit? I believe it supported ncurses and gtk+, and they were planning Qt. I suppose yours could also extend to Qt (if there was a good Perl binding like you said). __ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com
Re: [Cooker] Aurora - the devil's in the details
On Sat Aug 17 19:53 +0800, Leon Brooks wrote: Having read your reasoning, the idea of replacing Mandrake with RedHat is loopy, on a server or elsewhere. RedHat offer you less choices than Mandrake. Mandrake and SuSe, for example, _prefer_ KDE and so write most of their tools to it. RedHat essentially *requires* GNOME, militantly markets GNOME-alone. Thierry has covered that. But I do agree that since 8.x, Mandrake has definitely been a better Red Hat than Red Hat. [quality stuff snipped] Mandrake seems to have a genius for picking good versions and variants of things. Very rarely do they release a distro and then immediately afterwards have a security issue to patch, and they were early adopters of successful systems and services such as postfix. Counterbalancing this, their system for netting all bug reports seems to have leaks - at least from a user's perspective - or perhaps there simply aren't enough people on the incoming end to deal with them all. I think I've come up with the best way of describing Mandrake: an amalgam of good ideas from Red Hat, Debian, and MandrakeSoft. All in all, imho, an unbeatable combination. -- Levi Ramsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Was it something I said? And the stars look down. Linux 2.4.18-21mdk 4:45pm up 3 days, 16:49, 7 users, load average: 0.28, 0.28, 0.25
Re: [Cooker] Aurora - the devil's in the details
David Walser [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: - we already have a code base providing abstraction in the config tools for implementation into Gtk, Newt and stdio (interactive) That's really cool. Have you all looked at Stormix's abstraction toolkit? I believe it supported ncurses and gtk+, and they were planning Qt. I suppose yours could also extend to Qt (if there was a good Perl binding like you said). david faure has begun to do some work in that area (in kde's cvs) but the road is long before having interactive::qt; and at that moment, we'll have to check either to use interactive::qt or interactive::gtk :-) the real problem will be that some tools directly use my_gtk...
Re: [Cooker] Aurora - the devil's in the details
--- Thierry Vignaud [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: david faure has begun to do some work in that area (in kde's cvs) but the road is long before having interactive::qt; and at that moment, we'll have to check either to use interactive::qt or interactive::gtk :-) the real problem will be that some tools directly use my_gtk... Is that part of perl-MDK-Common? Guess you'll have to abstract my_gtk too. I'm assuming they use my_gtk for things that appear only in the gtk version(s) and not the newt version(s) :o) __ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com
