Quoting Thomas Mueller :
from Per olof Ljungmark:
I am finally in the process of removing KDE3 completely, switched to
Xfce some time ago, and wonder if any of you could recommend suitable
replacements for some of the apps:
kpdfpdf viewer with the ability to copy text from
Quoting Thomas Mueller :
from Per olof Ljungmark:
I am finally in the process of removing KDE3 completely, switched to
Xfce some time ago, and wonder if any of you could recommend suitable
replacements for some of the apps:
kpdfpdf viewer with the ability to copy text from
from Per olof Ljungmark:
> I am finally in the process of removing KDE3 completely, switched to
> Xfce some time ago, and wonder if any of you could recommend suitable
> replacements for some of the apps:
> kpdfpdf viewer with the ability to copy text from
> kWrite
2013/10/13 Per olof Ljungmark :
> Hi,
>
> I am finally in the process of removing KDE3 completely, switched to
> Xfce some time ago, and wonder if any of you could recommend suitable
> replacements for some of the apps:
>
> kpdfpdf viewer with the ability to copy t
Hi,
I am finally in the process of removing KDE3 completely, switched to
Xfce some time ago, and wonder if any of you could recommend suitable
replacements for some of the apps:
kpdfpdf viewer with the ability to copy text from
kWrite simple text editor with some filetype
Am 05.07.2013 00:27 (UTC+1) schrieb René Ladan:
> Hi,
>
> after closer inspection I discovered there are some 100 more ports that
> are affected by the KDE3 / QT3 removal, I generated a new patch at [1].
> You might want to look at the update to MOVED to see if your port is
>
Hi,
after closer inspection I discovered there are some 100 more ports that
are affected by the KDE3 / QT3 removal, I generated a new patch at [1].
You might want to look at the update to MOVED to see if your port is
there, patches for non-core QT3/KDE3 ports are welcome.
There are also a few
Jeffrey Bouquet
>>>> escribió:
>>>>
>>>>> bsdstats.org > ports stats would have that information probably
>>>>
>>>> http://bsdstats.org/ports.php?category=91
>>>>
>>>> says in column 'times in use':
&g
Hi,
(CC'd maintainers of ports that are scheduled for removal)
I have prepared a patch to remove the KDE3 and QT3 ports, it is
available at [1]. This patch also:
- removes ports/Mk/bsd.kde.mk (only used for KDE3/QT3)
- patches bsd.port.mk (removes USE_KDEBASE_VER, USE_KDELIBS_VER, USE_Q
t; ports stats would have that information probably
>>>
>>> http://bsdstats.org/ports.php?category=91
>>>
>>> says in column 'times in use':
>>>
>>> x11/kde3: 534
>>> x11/kde4: 86
>>
>> I feel as though I'
gt; http://bsdstats.org/ports.php?category=91
>>
>> says in column 'times in use':
>>
>> x11/kde3: 534
>> x11/kde4: 86
>
> I feel as though I'm in the happy minority who use and enjoy KDE4. My
> FreeBSD desktop/workstation is running it well
On 07/02/13 07:10, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> El día Monday, July 01, 2013 a las 08:05:37PM -0700, Jeffrey Bouquet
> escribió:
>
>> bsdstats.org > ports stats would have that information probably
>
> http://bsdstats.org/ports.php?category=91
>
> says in column 'tim
On 07/02/13 07:10, Matthias Apitz wrote:
El día Monday, July 01, 2013 a las 08:05:37PM -0700, Jeffrey Bouquet escribió:
bsdstats.org > ports stats would have that information probably
http://bsdstats.org/ports.php?category=91
says in column 'times in use':
x11/kde3: 534
René Ladan wrote:
> On 02-07-2013 07:10, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> > El día Monday, July 01, 2013 a las 08:05:37PM -0700, Jeffrey
> > Bouquet escribió:
> >
> >> bsdstats.org > ports stats would have that information probably
> >
> > http://bsdstats.org/ports.php?category=91
(bsdstats.org contact
On 02-07-2013 07:10, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> El día Monday, July 01, 2013 a las 08:05:37PM -0700, Jeffrey Bouquet escribió:
>
>> bsdstats.org > ports stats would have that information probably
>
> http://bsdstats.org/ports.php?category=91
>
> says in column 't
El día Monday, July 01, 2013 a las 08:05:37PM -0700, Jeffrey Bouquet escribió:
> bsdstats.org > ports stats would have that information probably
http://bsdstats.org/ports.php?category=91
says in column 'times in use':
x11/kde3: 534
x11/kde4: 86
matthias
--
bsdstats.org > ports stats would have that information probably
Here, I've installed snotes, xxdiff and a few others (qt33...) not kde3 per
se...
Subject: Re: kde3 ports expired today
Are there any numbers how many FreeBSD(!) users are using
On 07/01/13 16:40, Matthias Apitz wrote:
El día Monday, July 01, 2013 a las 10:26:13PM +0200, Per olof Ljungmark
escribió:
While I have full respect for this decision I am another example of one
that looses his desktop...
Actually, I'm not really using KDE3, but rather xfce but with the
El día Monday, July 01, 2013 a las 10:26:13PM +0200, Per olof Ljungmark
escribió:
> While I have full respect for this decision I am another example of one
> that looses his desktop...
>
> Actually, I'm not really using KDE3, but rather xfce but with the apps
> from KDE3
On 2013-07-01 11:38, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 10:20:22AM +0200, Matthias Apitz wrote:
>> El día Monday, July 01, 2013 a las 09:59:48AM +0200, René Ladan escribió:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> the KDE3 ports (263 of them) expired tod
Matthias Apitz writes:
> We have (perhaps) all seen this in UPDATING and while compiling qt3*
> ports; I think, it is not a good idea deleting the KDE3 ports (which do
> compile) from our ports tree, while the KDE4 ports do not compile, at
> least not on i386 architecture. See th
2013/7/1 Matthias Apitz :
> El día Monday, July 01, 2013 a las 09:59:48AM +0200, René Ladan escribió:
>
>> the KDE3 ports (263 of them) expired today. They were marked for
>> removal since December 30, so the plan is to remove them soon.
>>
>
> We have (perhaps) all s
On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 10:20:22AM +0200, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> El día Monday, July 01, 2013 a las 09:59:48AM +0200, René Ladan escribió:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > the KDE3 ports (263 of them) expired today. They were marked for
> > removal since December 30, so t
El día Monday, July 01, 2013 a las 09:59:48AM +0200, René Ladan escribió:
> Hi,
>
> the KDE3 ports (263 of them) expired today. They were marked for
> removal since December 30, so the plan is to remove them soon.
>
> Regards,
> Rene
Hi,
We have (perhaps) all seen this
Hi,
the KDE3 ports (263 of them) expired today. They were marked for
removal since December 30, so the plan is to remove them soon.
Regards,
Rene
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To
Hello,
I'm still an active user of KDE3, compiling from ports, at the moment
from SVN r315646; the ports Makefile say that the port will be removed
as of July 1st 2013 which would let me w/o my desktop. I will not switch
to KDE4 because this is an overkill for my FreeBSD netbook (EeePC 900
I was thinking of December patches. Till now, each time kde3 broke,
in few weeks someone would sent patch.
> A few clicks leads to nice UI experience with roughly the same
> amount of overheard as the 3.x
I simply do not believe that. Stripped (!) KDE3 is workable on PIII
system, to thi
On 09.01.2013 14:53, Adam Vande More wrote:
I don't use knotes, but have you tried the solution here?
http://forum.kde.org/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=84823
Obviously, knotes was just an example. All other customizations (such as menus,
backgrounds&screen-savers, email accounts -- everything under ~/.k
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 8:07 AM, Mikhail T. wrote:
> Worse, KDE4 is not only much heavier (which could've been acceptable).
This is simply not true, or at least easily remediable. A few clicks leads
to nice UI experience with roughly the same amount of overheard as the 3.x
series. There are a n
this
thread...
--
View this message in context:
http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/Why-delete-KDE3-ports-tp5775510p5776156.html
Sent from the freebsd-ports mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebs
On 08.01.2013 19:02, Jakub Lach wrote:
I'm on the fence. It's true, that there is no low-print feature complete
equivalent for KDE3.
Worse, KDE4 is not only much heavier (which could've been acceptable).
It is also not compatible -- people like myself, who customized their
I'm on the fence. It's true, that there is no low-print feature complete
equivalent for KDE3.
On the other hand, if nobody wants to maintain Trinity, well
it should be letten go, as sooner or later there will be problems.
--
View this message in context:
http://freebsd.1045724.n5.
lems have nowhere to be reported and
>> vulnerabilities common to KDE3 and KDE4 only get published and fixed in
>> the latter.
>
> This doesn't count?
> http://cve.mitre.org/cve/
> http://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/search?execution=e2s1
>
> It seems to be there is somewhere to rep
hard for it to be "known insecure"
since upstream does not maintain it even for security vulnerabilities
anymore, so security problems have nowhere to be reported and
vulnerabilities common to KDE3 and KDE4 only get published and fixed in
the latter.
This doesn't count?
http://cve.
rd for it to be "known insecure"
since upstream does not maintain it even for security vulnerabilities
anymore, so security problems have nowhere to be reported and
vulnerabilities common to KDE3 and KDE4 only get published and fixed in
the latter.
t seems a very slim chance indeed years
> could go by without maintenance and still maintain security.
I have a friend still happily using fvwm (not fvwm2). It is really,
really old, but it still works. It is not subject to deletion because
it still has a maintainer.
Being a maintainer of a port th
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 12:53 PM, John Marino wrote:
>
> Here's the issue I think some folks have:
>
> "Outdated": debatable. If outdated means a newer release is available,
> then yes. If "outdated" means it outlived its usefulness, I'd say no. This
> term seems subjectively used here.
>
> "pro
stream nor in the ports tree. They possibly
contain security vulnerabilities and they likely will break in the
future if a build or lib dependency gets updated as they assume a 5
year old environment.
The deprecation period was set to 6 month to give someone the
opportunity to update QT3 and K
they assume a 5
year old environment.
The deprecation period was set to 6 month to give someone the
opportunity to update QT3 and KDE3 to the Trinity fork and I'm happy
to offer exp-runs (once the clusters are back) if someone has patches
but I don't see a reason why we should keep p
On 01/07/13 15:43, John Marino wrote:
I don't normally agree with Mikhail's rants to save old ports, but in
the case of KDE-3, I am inclined to share his view.
Are KDE-3 ports causing any problems? I don't know if KDE-3 is still be
developed upstream, but if it's not it doesn't really need muc
Quoting "Mikhail T." :
On 07.01.2013 09:54, Kimmo Paasiala wrote:
Are you willing to step up as the maintainer of the KDE3 ports? Or
anyone else reading this? The situation with ports like KDE3 is that
they are lots of work to keep up in shape and if no one wants to
maintain them th
On 1/7/2013 16:04, Mikhail T. wrote:
On 07.01.2013 09:54, Kimmo Paasiala wrote:
Are you willing to step up as the maintainer of the KDE3 ports? Or
anyone else reading this? The situation with ports like KDE3 is that
they are lots of work to keep up in shape and if no one wants to
maintain them
On 07.01.2013 09:54, Kimmo Paasiala wrote:
Are you willing to step up as the maintainer of the KDE3 ports? Or
anyone else reading this? The situation with ports like KDE3 is that
they are lots of work to keep up in shape and if no one wants to
maintain them they succumb to what is called "b
l's rants to save old ports, but in the
> case of KDE-3, I am inclined to share his view.
>
> Are KDE-3 ports causing any problems? I don't know if KDE-3 is still be
> developed upstream, but if it's not it doesn't really need much maintenance.
>
> John
>
On 07.01.2013 09:41, David Demelier wrote:
Because Qt3 is old and KDE3 will completely disappear.
This is exactly the sentiment I find disagreeable -- that simply being
"old" is enough to condemn a perfectly functional piece of software.
Maybe, it is because of my own age, that I am
On 1/7/2013 15:22, Mikhail T. wrote:
On 07.01.2013 03:33, freebsd-ports-requ...@freebsd.org wrote:
portname: accessibility/kdeaccessibility
description: Accessibility applications for KDE
maintainer:po...@freebsd.org
deprecated because: Depends on QT3; unmaintained
expiration date: 2013-07-01
bu
Because Qt3 is old and KDE3 will completely disappear. It the same goal for
GNOME 2 (not for now because GNOME 3 is not yet available) but GNOME 2 will
ne probably replaced by MATE.
I think you should look at trinity. It is a fork of KDE3 and is in
development to be ported to Qt4 :)
http://mate
On 07.01.2013 03:33, freebsd-ports-requ...@freebsd.org wrote:
portname: accessibility/kdeaccessibility
description:Accessibility applications for KDE
maintainer:po...@freebsd.org
deprecated because: Depends on QT3; unmaintained
expiration date:2013-07-01
build errors:
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 6:52 PM, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
> BTW, if KDE3 is unmaintained and this gous for FreeBSD too, perhaps it
> should be mentioned in the Handbook?
I submitted these lines for the Handbook some time ago:
There are two versions of KDE available on FreeBSD. Version
PM, "Per olof Ljungmark"
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I find KDE4 unusable and xfce a bit weak for my purposes so I'm trying
>>>>> to
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> stic
On 05/31/2012 05:27 PM, Chris Rees wrote:
On 31 May 2012 17:52, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
On 05/31/12 14:16, Chris Rees wrote:
On May 31, 2012 12:39 PM, "Per olof Ljungmark"wrote:
I find KDE4 unusable and xfce a bit weak for my purposes so I'm trying to
stick to KD
On 31 May 2012 17:52, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
> On 05/31/12 14:16, Chris Rees wrote:
>>
>> On May 31, 2012 12:39 PM, "Per olof Ljungmark" wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> I find KDE4 unusable and xfce a bit weak for my purposes so I'm trying t
On 05/31/12 14:16, Chris Rees wrote:
On May 31, 2012 12:39 PM, "Per olof Ljungmark" wrote:
I find KDE4 unusable and xfce a bit weak for my purposes so I'm trying to
stick to KDE3.
Just a reminder that although people may try to help you, kde3 is
unmaintained.
On 05/31/12 14:32, Alberto Villa wrote:
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
I heard from somewhere that there is a fork of KDE3 maintained by folks that
just like me finds KDE4 unusable. Perhaps someone on the list knows more?
http://www.trinitydesktop.org
Ah, yes
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
> I heard from somewhere that there is a fork of KDE3 maintained by folks that
> just like me finds KDE4 unusable. Perhaps someone on the list knows more?
http://www.trinitydesktop.org
--
Alberto Villa, FreeBSD committer
On 2012-05-31 14:16, Chris Rees wrote:
On May 31, 2012 12:39 PM, "Per olof Ljungmark" wrote:
I find KDE4 unusable and xfce a bit weak for my purposes so I'm trying to
stick to KDE3.
Recent 9-STABLE amd64
Just a reminder that although people may try to help you, kde3
On May 31, 2012 12:39 PM, "Per olof Ljungmark" wrote:
>
> I find KDE4 unusable and xfce a bit weak for my purposes so I'm trying to
stick to KDE3.
>
> Recent 9-STABLE amd64
>
> mv -f .deps/talkconn.Tpo .deps/talkconn.Po
> rm -f libmach.a
> ar cru lib
I find KDE4 unusable and xfce a bit weak for my purposes so I'm trying
to stick to KDE3.
Recent 9-STABLE amd64
mv -f .deps/talkconn.Tpo .deps/talkconn.Po
rm -f libmach.a
ar cru libmach.a answmach.o forwmach.o talkconn.o
ranlib libmach.a
gmake[4]: Leaving directory
`/usr/ports/net/kdenet
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 3:07 PM, Raphael Kubo da Costa
wrote:
> Not sure I understood your question, but somehow /usr/local/qt4/include
> must be added to the include path before /usr/local/include.
No matter, I'll try to do it if you don't do it before. :)
--
Alberto Villa, FreeBSD committer
h
Alberto Villa writes:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 8:46 PM, Raphael Kubo da Costa
> wrote:
>> I just need some free time to take a look at the issue, I suspect the
>> fix can be done to a single place.
>>
>> But until then, feel free to set CONFLICTS_BUILD or something else :)
>
> Are you thinking
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 8:46 PM, Raphael Kubo da Costa
wrote:
> I just need some free time to take a look at the issue, I suspect the
> fix can be done to a single place.
>
> But until then, feel free to set CONFLICTS_BUILD or something else :)
Are you thinking about moving the KDE directories at
Alberto Villa writes:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Raphael Kubo da Costa
> wrote:
>> This seems to be a recurring issue. It looks like the qt3 includes in
>> /usr/local/include get picked up before the qt4 ones in
>> /usr/local/qt4/include.
>
> CONFLICTS_BUILD? I'm not sure we want to fix
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Raphael Kubo da Costa
wrote:
> This seems to be a recurring issue. It looks like the qt3 includes in
> /usr/local/include get picked up before the qt4 ones in
> /usr/local/qt4/include.
CONFLICTS_BUILD? I'm not sure we want to fix all those include_directories()...
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Raphael Kubo da Costa
wrote:
> This seems to be a recurring issue. It looks like the qt3 includes in
> /usr/local/include get picked up before the qt4 ones in
> /usr/local/qt4/include.
CONFLICTS_BUILD? I'm not sure we want to fix all those include_directories()...
Rainer Hurling writes:
> I had to deinstall qt-3.3.8_13, then install kdelibs4 (+ other kde4
> ports) and afterwards reinstall qt-3.3.8_13 again.
This seems to be a recurring issue. It looks like the qt3 includes in
/usr/local/include get picked up before the qt4 ones in
/usr/local/qt4/include.
Rainer Hurling schreef:
I had to deinstall qt-3.3.8_13, then install kdelibs4 (+ other kde4
ports) and afterwards reinstall qt-3.3.8_13 again.
Hope this helps,
Rainer Hurling
On 17.10.2011 12:51 (UTC+2), Leslie Jensen wrote:
2011-10-17 10:20, Andrea Venturoli skrev:
On 10/17/11 10:08, Albe
I had to deinstall qt-3.3.8_13, then install kdelibs4 (+ other kde4
ports) and afterwards reinstall qt-3.3.8_13 again.
Hope this helps,
Rainer Hurling
On 17.10.2011 12:51 (UTC+2), Leslie Jensen wrote:
2011-10-17 10:20, Andrea Venturoli skrev:
On 10/17/11 10:08, Alberto Villa wrote:
I'
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 20:13:30 +0200
Alberto Villa wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 7:11 PM, Ion-Mihai Tetcu
> wrote:
> >> If you have both kdenetwork3 and 4, well, I don't know. You can try
> >> proceeding with that step and seeing if kdenetwork3 still works,
> >> and report back. I thought it wa
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 7:11 PM, Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote:
>> If you have both kdenetwork3 and 4, well, I don't know. You can try
>> proceeding with that step and seeing if kdenetwork3 still works, and
>> report back. I thought it was quite unlikely that people had
>> kdenetwork3 and 4 installed at t
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 10:08:57 +0200
Alberto Villa wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Andrea Venturoli
> wrote:
> > Using KDE3, I have ortp as a dependency of kdenetwork.
> > Should I follow the above or is it ok only for KDE4?
> > Is it needed? Would it harm anyt
2011/10/17 Leslie Jensen :
>
>
> 2011-10-17 10:20, Andrea Venturoli skrev:
>>
>> On 10/17/11 10:08, Alberto Villa wrote:
>
>
>
>
> I've got another problem with this update! Kdelibs wont build.
>
> I followed the instructions in UPDATE.
>
>
> [ 56%] Building CXX object kio/CMakeFiles/kio.dir/kio/ks
2011-10-17 10:20, Andrea Venturoli skrev:
On 10/17/11 10:08, Alberto Villa wrote:
I've got another problem with this update! Kdelibs wont build.
I followed the instructions in UPDATE.
[ 56%] Building CXX object kio/CMakeFiles/kio.dir/kio/ksambasharedata.o
[ 56%] Building CXX object kio/
On 10/17/11 10:08, Alberto Villa wrote:
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Andrea Venturoli wrote:
Using KDE3, I have ortp as a dependency of kdenetwork.
Should I follow the above or is it ok only for KDE4?
Is it needed? Would it harm anything?
linphone-base is required by kdenetwork4, if you
On 10/17/11 10:08, Alberto Villa wrote:
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Andrea Venturoli wrote:
Using KDE3, I have ortp as a dependency of kdenetwork.
Should I follow the above or is it ok only for KDE4?
Is it needed? Would it harm anything?
linphone-base is required by kdenetwork4, if you
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Andrea Venturoli wrote:
> Using KDE3, I have ortp as a dependency of kdenetwork.
> Should I follow the above or is it ok only for KDE4?
> Is it needed? Would it harm anything?
linphone-base is required by kdenetwork4, if you don't have it you can
Hello.
I've seen UPDATING 20111016: having only a few bits of KDE4 left-over, I
decided to clean them all, so I almost didn't need to mv and rm as reported.
However, I'm a bit doubtful on:
> portmaster -o net/linphone-base ortp
Using KDE3, I have ortp as a dependency of kd
> Ah, Pearson!
Whoops :(
Hope he'll not get mad of me for misspelling his name if he sees it :)
>
> Well, there are even more "interesting"
> ideas.
>
> http://trinity-devel.pearsoncomputing.net/?0::3095
That at least seems fun. For me.
But not usefull at all, yes.
>
> PS. Porting to Qt4?
>
>
oadMap
--
View this message in context:
http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/KDE3-de-facto-EOL-Project-Trinity-tp4885362p4898252.html
Sent from the freebsd-ports mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 09:57:30AM -0700, Jakub Lach wrote:
> <...>
>
> > I do not like the idea of Preston to
> > rewrite KDE3 to Qt4 (see no profits & so on).
>
> Where that idea came from?
> Is it Preston Brown's?
I've meant Timoty Pres
Hello,
I'm as well a happy user of KDE3 in all my laptops and even my small
EeePC 900 netbook. I don't want to miss this, because I think KDE4 is
hunting in wrong directions from the point of view of the end user.
While this is a personal opinion, it turned out that KDE4 just did n
<...>
> I do not like the idea of Preston to
> rewrite KDE3 to Qt4 (see no profits & so on).
Where that idea came from?
Is it Preston Brown's?
--
View this message in context:
http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/KDE3-de-facto-EOL-Project-Trinity-tp4885362p4896214.html
> Hello,
>
> --
Hi list!
> Judging from latest commits, KDE3 moved
> swiftly from "stall, but usable" to explicitly
Im very interested in supporting KDE3 to live on FreeBSD
But have a lack of any programming experience and so,
so just Im scared of it. If anyone could
Well, Brendan Fabeny fixed qt33 and affected kde bits.
Thanks!
--
View this message in context:
http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/KDE3-de-facto-EOL-Project-Trinity-tp4885362p4892915.html
Sent from the freebsd-ports mailing list archive at Nabble.com
On Tue, 2011-10-11 at 16:32 +0400, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
>
> 09.10.2011, 22:30, "Jakub Lach":
> > Speaking of lightness, XFCE is memory hungry
> > these days and Linux centric, and Fluxbox is
> > not that light after all.
>
> Are you
09.10.2011, 22:30, "Jakub Lach":
> Speaking of lightness, XFCE is memory hungry
> these days and Linux centric, and Fluxbox is
> not that light after all.
Are you saying that Fluxbox is heavier than KDE3??
--
Regards,
Konstantin
__
I know, but neither is direct KDE3 replacement,
nor does offer "complete user experience"
(whatever it means, but I'm thinking of
UI consistence mainly).
Speaking of lightness, XFCE is memory hungry
these days and Linux centric, and Fluxbox is
not that light after all.
I per
Op 09-10-2011 16:53, Jakub Lach schreef:
> Hello,
>
> Judging from latest commits, KDE3 moved
> swiftly from "stall, but usable" to explicitly
> unsupported.
>
> However, there are still areas, where KDE3
> can't be replaced by newer version.
>
On Sun, 9 Oct 2011 07:53:30 -0700 (PDT)
Jakub Lach wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Judging from latest commits, KDE3 moved
> swiftly from "stall, but usable" to explicitly
> unsupported.
>
> However, there are still areas, where KDE3
> can't be replaced by newer v
Hello,
Judging from latest commits, KDE3 moved
swiftly from "stall, but usable" to explicitly
unsupported.
However, there are still areas, where KDE3
can't be replaced by newer version.
(e.g. I maintain older pc that is mainly used
as internet browser, where I installed
sl
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 08:51:02AM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> It would be useful if there was a mechanism to warn users
> that the port they are about to install (or have installed) is no
> longer recommended.
IMHO using DEPRECATED without EXPIRATION_DATE is just fine for this.
mcl
On 2011-Jul-07 23:13:08 +0400, Max Brazhnikov wrote:
>Until ports are not broken or/and forbidden I see no reason for deprecation
>and removing them.
>However you may consider this step as a recommendation to migrate from
>Qt3/KDE3 ports to anything else.
I would suggest that
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 7:49 AM, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> Max Brazhnikov wrote:
> >
> > The KDE FreeBSD team has officially dropped support for Qt3/KDE3
> > ports. We are not going to remove them in the near future, so
> > you can continue to use them. But w
Matthias Apitz writes:
> Max Brazhnikov wrote:
>>
>> The KDE FreeBSD team has officially dropped support for Qt3/KDE3
>> ports. We are not going to remove them in the near future, so
>> you can continue to use them. But we strongly recommend you to
>> consider
Max Brazhnikov wrote:
>
> The KDE FreeBSD team has officially dropped support for Qt3/KDE3
> ports. We are not going to remove them in the near future, so
> you can continue to use them. But we strongly recommend you to
> consider alternative solutions.
While I can understand t
on 08/07/2011 13:30 Matthias Andree said the following:
> Am 08.07.2011 06:25, schrieb Dima Panov:
>> hello!
>>
>> 08.07.2011, 18:25, per...@pluto.rain.com:
>>> Max Brazhnikov ; wrote:
>>>
>>>> The KDE FreeBSD team has officially dropped su
Am 08.07.2011 06:25, schrieb Dima Panov:
> hello!
>
> 08.07.2011, 18:25, per...@pluto.rain.com:
>> Max Brazhnikov ; wrote:
>>
>>> The KDE FreeBSD team has officially dropped support for Qt3/KDE3
>>> ports. We are not going to remove them in the near futur
hello!
08.07.2011, 18:25, per...@pluto.rain.com:
> Max Brazhnikov ; wrote:
>
>> The KDE FreeBSD team has officially dropped support for Qt3/KDE3
>> ports. We are not going to remove them in the near future, so
>> you can continue to use them. But we strongly recom
per...@pluto.rain.com writes:
> Max Brazhnikov wrote:
>
>> The KDE FreeBSD team has officially dropped support for Qt3/KDE3
>> ports. We are not going to remove them in the near future, so
>> you can continue to use them. But we strongly recommend you to
>>
Max Brazhnikov wrote:
> The KDE FreeBSD team has officially dropped support for Qt3/KDE3
> ports. We are not going to remove them in the near future, so
> you can continue to use them. But we strongly recommend you to
> consider alternative solutions.
Can you recommend an alt
On Jul 7, 2011, at 21:13 , Max Brazhnikov wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Jul 2011 11:09:37 -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
>> On 07/07/2011 10:21, Max Brazhnikov wrote:
>>> Reset maintainership de jure. In fact KDE 3 has not been maintained by
>>> our team
>>>
>>> for a long time, not to mention upstream.
>>>
1 - 100 of 142 matches
Mail list logo
