Re: Red Hat's Bluecurve (was: Red Hat 8.0 is 'official')
In a message dated: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 19:08:59 EDT Randy Edwards said: Debian rules, RH Sucks vi is for wimps Linux Hm, can't really find much to disagree with. Inconsistent rubbish. Any *real* Debianer knows it's GNU/Linux -- just like Debian prints on its web site. FWIW, it's *Debian* GNU/Linux because *they* chose to name their distibution that. Any *real* Linux user knows that the kernel is Linux, and in general, a system running the Linux kernel is known as a Linux system. If you want to get specific, you may choose to identify the distribution by it's proper name, such as Debian GNU/Linux, Red Hat Linux, Mandrake Linux, SuSE Linux, etc. :-P -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Red Hat's Bluecurve (was: Red Hat 8.0 is 'official')
Hmm, now that I think about it, it's been a while since we had a decent flame war around here, so, since I remembered my asbestos underwear today, let me lob the first volley ;) Debian rules, RH Sucks vi is for wimps Linux Hm, can't really find much to disagree with. Except the asbestos underwear. That must be itchy. Erik __ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos More http://faith.yahoo.com ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Red Hat's Bluecurve (was: Red Hat 8.0 is 'official')
In a message dated: Sat, 05 Oct 2002 18:49:53 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Certain other rabid zealots fired back remarks about how KDE is under the GPL, so Red Hat can do anything they darn well please. Naturally, they also had to bring up the throughly dead KDE/Qt licensing issue one more time, just for good measure. Damn! You mean I missed a good, I'm-holier-than-thou-even-though-I'm -a-hypocrite flame war? Did they bring up Debian vs. RH, or Emacs vs. vi? Or Linux vs. GNU/Linux? Hmm, now that I think about it, it's been a while since we had a decent flame war around here, so, since I remembered my asbestos underwear today, let me lob the first volley ;) Debian rules, RH Sucks vi is for wimps Linux ;) -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Red Hat's Bluecurve (was: Red Hat 8.0 is 'official')
On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 10:48:15AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hmm, now that I think about it, it's been a while since we had a decent flame war around here, so, since I remembered my asbestos underwear today, let me lob the first volley ;) Debian rules, RH Sucks vi is for wimps Linux coffee r0x0rs, tea sux! So there! (trying to hold mug steady) -Mark ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Red Hat's Bluecurve (was: Red Hat 8.0 is 'official')
In a message dated: Sat, 05 Oct 2002 20:52:46 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: I have always, by accident rather then by dint of planning, moved from N.1 or N.2 to N+1.1 so I have yet to experience a RH N.0 release. I do this by design. My rule of thumb is *always* avoid an X.0 release of *anything* (well, for production anyway. playing or systems used for educational purposes obviously preclude this rule and allow you to do stupid things like use .0 or 0.0 releases :) Are all of RH N.0 release typically accompanied by more problems then the N.1 or N.2 releases ? Tradionally, yes. 5.0 I believe was the release where they switched to the new glibc, I don't remember the problem with 6.0, but 7.0 was the compiler debacle, 8.0 seems to be the desktop debacle. I don't remember what the 2.0, 3.0, or 4.0 problems were. But, suffice it to say that: - a RH X.0 release usually introduces a significant number of enhancements and new features, as well as major problems - an X.1 release fixes a good portion of those bugs, but not usually enough to consider the system stable enough for use as a server - an X.2 release is usually the flagship release of the X release - and an X.3 release is pretty much unheard of, and IMO, indicative of just how much was wrong with the entire 7.x series :) Is RH duplicating the problems automobile manufacturers have whenever they bring out a new car model? The more they change the more that is broken? What company doesnt' do this? I'm wondering because I was just considering a move from 7.2 to 8.0 when I started hearing about 8.0 probs and it seemed to a higher level of severity than I've heard before. Personally, I'd wait until at least 8.1, if not 8.2. .1 is likely to be out within a couple months. As a rule of thumb - don't dot oh ? I certainly don't :) -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Red Hat's Bluecurve (was: Red Hat 8.0 is 'official')
In a message dated: 05 Oct 2002 22:35:55 EDT Paul Iadonisi said: Here, I'm afraid, I somewhat agree. The new window manager for Gnome 2.0, metacity, is basically crippling for me. Well, it's good to know that I haven't missed *anything* by sticking with fvwm over the years :) Someone wake me up when it becomes worthwile to bother looking at another windowmanager ! Push the browser button and you get mozilla, but there's nothing to tell you that you'd get mozilla if you push it. :-( And most dumb (and even some smart) users, don't care. They just want to browse the net. It could be worse, you could've gotten Netscape 4.77 :) It's now impossible to have the Gnome panel(s) be anything but always-on-top. Is this only if you're running Gnome? Or does it apply to running the panel in other windows managers? IOW, I use fvwm, but I run the Gnome panel (mostly because I really like the the AfterStep clock applet:) Does that mean I can no longer go to Panel-Properties-All Properties and select my own Panel Window level? The default is to keep it always on top, but that property seems to be inherited from the Gnome Global Preferences, and can be (in 1.4) changed on a per object basis. -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Red Hat's Bluecurve (was: Red Hat 8.0 is 'official')
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Ed Lawson wrote: =On Mon, 07 Oct 2002 10:48:15 -0400 =[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: = = = Hmm, now that I think about it, it's been a while since we had a = decent flame war around here, so, since I remembered my asbestos = underwear today, let me lob the first volley ;) = = Debian rules, RH Sucks = =How can you start a flame war by stating the obvvious? g = =Now about Vi. Hey, I met a guy who could number his paragraphs with roman numerals with macros in vi. :-) I declare him to be a better man than I, despite my 140K .emacs file. -- -Time flies like the wind. Fruit flies like a banana. Stranger things have - -happened but none stranger than this. Does your driver's license say Organ -Donor?Black holes are where God divided by zero. Listen to me! We are all- -individuals! What if this weren't a hypothetical question? [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Red Hat's Bluecurve (was: Red Hat 8.0 is 'official')
On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 11:14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] It's now impossible to have the Gnome panel(s) be anything but always-on-top. Is this only if you're running Gnome? Or does it apply to running the panel in other windows managers? NITPICK Gnome is not a window manager. You can use any gnome compliant (there is actually a document for programmers on how to make their window managers gnome compliant) window manager in gnome. /NITPICK IOW, I use fvwm, but I run the Gnome panel (mostly because I really like the the AfterStep clock applet:) Does that mean I can no longer go to Panel-Properties-All Properties and select my own Panel Window level? Yup, it's a Gnome 2.0 thing, not a window manager thing. There are *much* fewer properties available for setting in the Gnome 2.0 panel. As a matter of fact: GRIPE MODE=ON LEVEL=EXCRUCIATINGLY HIGH After complaining a bit directly to Havoc Pennington (the metacity author) about how crippling metacity was for me, I hopped on over to the gnome-usability mailing list archives. Apparently, it is a friggin' *stated goal* to remove many configuration options from Gnome. This is supposedly to prevent confusion among non-technical users. My question is, what pray tell, does having more options have to do with confusion?!?! I mean, if you want to hide the options and relegate them to the old way of using vi (oops, sorry, emacs if you so choose ;-)) to edit dot-files, then fine. REMOVING the configurability accomplishes nothing but aggravating the technical user. Hide it so it doesn't clutter menus and property sheets, but DON'T REMOVE them. I've also seen the argument that a fixed non-configurable behavior makes the code more maintainable. This is a real concern (making the code more maintainable) but has ZERO to do with usability arguments, yet I have seen it brought up on the usability list. I've also seen the code maintainability argument brought up in the GTK+ vs. QT wars, but with usability in mind. I can't address the ease of each toolkit from the programmers point of view, since I haven't done any programming for some time, but once again, I say, that usability (the user perspective) and code maintainability (the programmer perspective) have zero to do with each other. Yes, maintainable code means that things can be done faster, and therefore get working code out there to a wider user base faster. But, I've actually seen people argue that if you can code it fast, and it works, then who cares if it's right or pure. Well, now I know why there is so much bad code, security-wise out there. Improving development speed can be important (time-to-market, yada yada), but not at the expense of doing things wrong (term used loosely, here, of course). That's the way of the proprietary software world -- a way that free software authors would be wise to never adopt. This is the problem I see with a number of programmers (and I count myself among the people how need to take note of this at times): they're often more concerned with improving their own development process than they are with improving the user experience. The two aren't mutually exclusive, but too often, I find the later neglected. /GRIPE MODE=off *Whew* /Paul takes a deep breath Sorry, I had to get that out of my system. If it starts a flame war, so be it. Perhaps it something that *needs* to be hashed out. The default is to keep it always on top, but that property seems to be inherited from the Gnome Global Preferences, and can be (in 1.4) changed on a per object basis. I'll refrain from any comments about always on top. :-) :-) -- -Paul Iadonisi Senior System Administrator Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist Ever see a penguin fly? -- Try Linux. GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Red Hat's Bluecurve (was: Red Hat 8.0 is 'official')
On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 11:02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] - and an X.3 release is pretty much unheard of, and IMO, indicative of just how much was wrong with the entire 7.x series :) Minor nit: I know the inside story about why there was a 7.3 and can only say that it had zero to do with the problems or lack of problems with 7.2. [snip] Personally, I'd wait until at least 8.1, if not 8.2. .1 is likely to be out within a couple months. Well, Red Hat has been pretty darned consistent with releasing every six months. As a rule, it has been March and September, sometimes plus or minus one to four weeks. As a rule of thumb - don't dot oh ? I certainly don't :) I usually don't, but this time I took the plunge since I was much more involved in testing betas than before. I haven't seen any major problems with it (other than problems that are not Red Hat specific, outlined in my previous two posts on the topic). Given the major version change in the compiler, the desktop work, and the inclusion of OpenOffice.org, I think they've done *much* better job than the previous three dot-oh releases. OpenOffice.org is a BIG deal, by the way: even with all my experience building rpms, I couldn't for the life of me, starting with the source tarball, manage to get an rpm built. -- -Paul Iadonisi Senior System Administrator Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist Ever see a penguin fly? -- Try Linux. GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Red Hat's Bluecurve (was: Red Hat 8.0 is 'official')
In a message dated: 07 Oct 2002 14:55:11 EDT Paul Iadonisi said: On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 11:14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] It's now impossible to have the Gnome panel(s) be anything but always-on-top. Is this only if you're running Gnome? Or does it apply to running the panel in other windows managers? NITPICK Gnome is not a window manager. You can use any gnome compliant (there is actually a document for programmers on how to make their window managers gnome compliant) window manager in gnome. /NITPICK REALLYNITPICK I know Gnome, and KDE, CDE, etc. for that matter, are more than window managers. However, I explicitly asked if you need to be running GNOME. This implies, IMO, that I am *not* running Gnome, but rather, using ANYTHING ELSE, but choose to run a Gnome application, of which the Gnome panel is but one. Therefore, my question is more than valid, since no where did I equate or even state that Gnome was just a window manager. /REALLYNITPICK SARCASM Btw, I have yet to see Gnome or KDE do anything overly useful other than provide a more visually appealing and resource intensive window manager replacement ;) /SARCASM IOW, I use fvwm, but I run the Gnome panel (mostly because I really like the the AfterStep clock applet:) Does that mean I can no longer go to Panel-Properties-All Properties and select my own Panel Window level? Yup, it's a Gnome 2.0 thing, not a window manager thing. There are *much* fewer properties available for setting in the Gnome 2.0 panel. Guess I'll be sticking with fvwm for quite a while then :) As a matter of fact: GRIPE MODE=ON LEVEL=EXCRUCIATINGLY HIGH Apparently, it is a friggin' *stated goal* to remove many configuration options from Gnome. So where's the value add to switch from MS ? Sure, there's the it's free argument, but for most users, they don't care. They paid for a computer which comes with an OS. They don't care which one, and as far as they're concerned, MS is free with the purchase of their computer. Therefore, the only diffentiating factor is, what can Linux do that MS Windows can't. If the answer is nothing, but it looks cool, then we just lost. -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Red Hat's Bluecurve (was: Red Hat 8.0 is 'official')
In a message dated: 07 Oct 2002 15:07:26 EDT Paul Iadonisi said: On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 11:02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] - and an X.3 release is pretty much unheard of, and IMO, indicative of just how much was wrong with the entire 7.x series :) Minor nit: I know the inside story about why there was a 7.3 and can only say that it had zero to do with the problems or lack of problems with 7.2. Well then, please enlighten us :) Incorrect statements are usually the result of assumptions and ignorance. I did assume, because I am ignorant of any other mitigating factors. Please correct me. -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Red Hat's Bluecurve (was: Red Hat 8.0 is 'official')
On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 15:26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated: 07 Oct 2002 15:07:26 EDT Paul Iadonisi said: On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 11:02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] - and an X.3 release is pretty much unheard of, and IMO, indicative of just how much was wrong with the entire 7.x series :) Minor nit: I know the inside story about why there was a 7.3 and can only say that it had zero to do with the problems or lack of problems with 7.2. Well then, please enlighten us :) The basic issue is that Red Hat only bumps major release numbers when there are backward (or is it forward? Or both maybe? I forgot) binary compatibility issues. I think the fact that they stuck with the .0, .1, .2 release numbers is purely coincidental. There was nothing in the release following 7.2 to justify calling it 8.0, so they stuck with the 7.x numbering. They try not to play release number races with other distros. (Actual, most distros have been pretty good about not doing that. Now Solaris -- that's another story ;-)). -- -Paul Iadonisi Senior System Administrator Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist Ever see a penguin fly? -- Try Linux. GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Red Hat's Bluecurve (was: Red Hat 8.0 is 'official')
In a message dated: 07 Oct 2002 15:50:12 EDT Paul Iadonisi said: The basic issue is that Red Hat only bumps major release numbers when there are backward (or is it forward? Or both maybe? I forgot) binary compatibility issues. I think the fact that they stuck with the .0, .1, .2 release numbers is purely coincidental. There was nothing in the release following 7.2 to justify calling it 8.0, so they stuck with the 7.x numbering. So what was in 7.3? Was it enhancements or something? I don't think I've actually played with 7.3 at all (came out while I was between jobs and I haven't had a need to use Linux for much of anything other than my own desktop, which is Debian. Hmmm, maybe I should get vmware :) They try not to play release number races with other distros. (Actual, most distros have been pretty good about not doing that. Now Solaris -- that's another story ;-)). What do mean by that? Solaris is still on 2.x, 2.9 just got released? (Remember, it's only the output of 'uname' that matters, since we tech weenies never pay attention to marketing efforts ;) -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Red Hat's Bluecurve (was: Red Hat 8.0 is 'official')
Debian rules, RH Sucks vi is for wimps Linux Hm, can't really find much to disagree with. Inconsistent rubbish. Any *real* Debianer knows it's GNU/Linux -- just like Debian prints on its web site. And while vi isn't my favorite editor, I'm afraid to nominate joe 'cause everyone will think I'm a l00ser... -- If the current stylistic distinctions between open-source and commercial software persist, an open-software revolution could lead to yet another divide between haves and have-nots: those with the skills and connections to make use of free software, and those who must pay high prices for increasingly dated commercial offerings. -- Scientific American ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Red Hat's Bluecurve (was: Red Hat 8.0 is 'official')
On 7 Oct 2002, at 3:50pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Minor nit: I know the inside story about why there was a 7.3 and can only say that it had zero to do with the problems or lack of problems with 7.2. The basic issue is that Red Hat only bumps major release numbers when there are backward (or is it forward? Or both maybe? I forgot) binary compatibility issues. Forward. A binary built on Red Hat Linux release x.y must work on any Red Hat Linux release with the same value for x (assuming dependencies are solved). For example, a binary built on Red Hat 7.0 will not run on 6.2, because the compiler changed (and GCC, as a rule, does not maintain compatibility with anything). Backwards compatibility means that a binary built for an older release of Red Hat Linux should work on a newer release. This is accomplished by including various compatibility libraries, i.e., newer releases of Red Hat include libraries compatible with older releases. I think the fact that they stuck with the .0, .1, .2 release numbers is purely coincidental. I do not think it was conincidence. It appears that Red Hat could give us three releases before so many neat new things made the pain of breaking binary compatibility worth it in someone's eyes. If the number of neat new things introduced per unit of time is roughly constant, we would see this behavior. Actual, most distros have been pretty good about not doing that. *cough* Slackware *cough*;-) -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Red Hat's Bluecurve (was: Red Hat 8.0 is 'official')
On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, at 9:53am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Or are you referring to the much-overblown Bluecurve issue? Since I don't follow RH's releases very closely anymore, care to educate me (and other non-RH fanatics :) on what the Bluecurve issue is? With Red Hat Linux 8.0, Red Hat Software has introduced Bluecurve, which is a family of themes for KDE, GNOME, GTK, etc., designed to unify the appearance of their distribution's programs. With prior releases, a GNOME program would look different from a KDE program. Now they all look much more alike. RHS has also changed the default desktops, panels, menus, and associations of KDE and GNOME to be similar. For example, in RHL 8.0, KDE uses Mozilla for web-browsing by default, instead of Konquerer. Presumably, Red Hat's target market (corporate IT departments) likes that sort of thing. This has made a certain very small but very vocal minority of KDE users and developers go absolutely apeshit. Apparently, they think Red Hat is making KDE unpure or some such thing. Of course, this isn't anything that other distro vendors -- notably Mandrake and SuSE -- haven't done. But those other distros were either too small to worry about, or they were using KDE as the default desktop, so the rabid KDE zealots did not object. Certain other rabid zealots fired back remarks about how KDE is under the GPL, so Red Hat can do anything they darn well please. Naturally, they also had to bring up the throughly dead KDE/Qt licensing issue one more time, just for good measure. Even so, the issue would have been relegated to the fringe that it comes from, if not for the fact that major Linux sites like Slashdot and Linux Today got ahold of it, which created a self-perpetuating flamewar for a couple of weeks until all the sane people got tired of listening to the fringe whine. Deprived of their audience, they went back to pulling the legs off spiders, or whatever it is those types do when they lose the spotlight. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
