Prev: google down?
Next: need bash-line: find files containing "string" ?
From: King Beowulf on 6 Apr 2008 16:44
On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 17:21:26 -0500, Longfellow wrote:

> Bought a new printer. 10.0 couldn't handle it. Massive upgrade
> necessary. Arg...
>
> Been running 10.0 on an ASUS CUBX and Cel 500 w/ 512 meg RAM. A comfy
> and mature install years old now. And now I've got it all to do over
> again. The bloom of exploration and multiple distros and kernels and
> all that stuff died years ago, so I'm not really into a lot of hard work
> here. But having Slackware on my box is not negotiable, so...
>
> I run a number of Gnome apps, although not the desktop itself (Fluxbox
> forever...), and it is really unclear how much Gnome is required to run
> them. So I'm trying to figure out if I have to install Gnome itself,
> and if so, how. What I think I know:
>
> 1) No Gnome in Slack since 10.0.
>
> 2) At the point at which I was still considering keeping a current
> distro on board, no consensus existed as to what to do about Gnome.
>
> 3) I note that there are an assortment of Gnome based apps in 12.0, and
> so presume there are some Gnome libraries included; they can't all be
> statically compiled, I would think!
>
> ----------snip------------------
>
> Thanks all,
>
> Longfellow

I run a few gnome type apps under Slackware and SLAMD64. Usually all the
libs needed are already in the the full install. Others can be gotten easily
(slackbuilds.org or linuxpackages.net). I also use gtk-qt-engine to get a bit
better desktop integration in KDE.

Enjoy.

From: Douglas Mayne on 7 Apr 2008 12:06
On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 17:21:26 -0500, Longfellow wrote:

> Bought a new printer. 10.0 couldn't handle it. Massive upgrade
> necessary. Arg...
>
<snip>
>
> 4) Compiling Gnome from source appears to be unthinkable, although the
> Gnome site offers a Gnome specific compiler to do the dirty work. I've
> not been able to discover how well that is received by the user
> community.
>
> 5) Third party sources like Dropline do things to the Slack install that
> gross out the purists: PAM? I've seen references to other such
> sources, but don't recall what they were, although IIRC some positive
> response was included in the citations.
>
My desktop is Dropline Gnome on Slackware 12+. It is not that intrusive,
IMO, but maybe I am kindling a flame war over PAM. I like it very much.
BTW, I have upgraded X past the versions included with a fully patched
Slackware 12. The method that I used was to obtain source from slackware
-current and recompile. That was probably overly conservative, as the
compiled packages in -current would likely have worked.

> Now, I've got the HD space to install everything, so that's not a
> concern. But I don't want a lot of bullshit hassle just to get things
> to work, it'll be enough to redo all the petty configuration and I know
> better than to presume I can just port the relevant files from 10.0 to
> 12.0.
>
> Slack is supposed to "just work", and I want to get there with the least
> amount of effort and time; yeah I'm old and crotchety but I do have a
> lot of work already in progress and I need that damned printer!
>
Dropline Gnome.

> And yeah I'll do what I have to do to get things back up and running,
> but I'd sure appreciate of the renewal process cut me some "Slack",
> dontchaknow. Whatever advice and comments you "bozos" care to dish out
> is welcome :D
>
> Thanks all,
>
> Longfellow
>
Note: comments inline.

I ran GWare's gnome under slackware 10.2. After a lull in release, it
appears GWare has updated their site. In the meantime, I tested
garnome and gnomeslackbuild before settling on Dropline. IMO, that is
easiest to install and work with. YMMV. BTW, the inclusion of PAM on a
desktop machine with a fully inbound firewall should not pose that serious
of security issues. Also, a lot of water has gone under the bridge with
PAM; all of the major distributions except Slackware include it, AFAIK.

--
Douglas Mayne
From: Robby Workman on 9 Apr 2008 01:07
On 2008-04-06, Dave Uhring <daveuhring(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> ... although XFCE-4.2 works pretty well.
>

Well, if you like 4.2, you should really like 4.4.2 (which
will be in Slackware 12.1).

-RW
From: Dave Uhring on 9 Apr 2008 03:51
On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 05:07:51 +0000, Robby Workman wrote:

> On 2008-04-06, Dave Uhring <daveuhring(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> ... although XFCE-4.2 works pretty well.
>>
>
> Well, if you like 4.2, you should really like 4.4.2 (which
> will be in Slackware 12.1).

Oops. I did mistype that. I built 4.4.2 from the SlackBuild for
-current. I had been following -current binaries for a couple of months,
then one day discovered that graphics had become really broken.

So I reinstalled 12.0 and updated a few things using SlackBuilds and
source.

From: Peter on 13 Apr 2008 06:03
On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 17:21:26 -0500, Longfellow wrote:

all snip....

use garnome. www.gnome.org/projects/garnome. It is a self compiling and
totally insulated installation of gnome. It will not conflict with an
existing Slackware installation. You may need to install a few stock
packages for compiling, but it's terrific. Can compile the entire gnome
suite or just certain applications.

--
Peter
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: google down?
Next: need bash-line: find files containing "string" ?