On Fri, 2006-01-20 at 09:37 +0800, Davyd Madeley wrote: > Quoting David Zeuthen <david fubar dk>: > > > What is the point here? Most distributions nowadays either support only > > GNOME or KDE; sure, they ship the other, but focus on just one of them. > > Personally I think that is fine.. We'll get kick-ass GNOME distros and > > kick-ass KDE distros. > > > Also.. do you really think the GNOME and KDE people can agree on a > > settings format for said system daemon? I think it would be a mistake. > > Also, from a more pragmatic point of view... Is it worth splitting e.g. > > g-p-m into two daemons simply to feed settings from gconf from one to > > the other? I think the answer to this question is no. > > Personally, I always imagined a system that functioned more like > NetworkManager. > > Which brings me to another point. NetworkManager is not part of Desktop. We > leave it up to vendors to decide whether or not NetworkManager should be > shipped, or should be shipped by default. > > Additionally, while we have heard that Ubuntu, SuSE and Fedora will be > shipping > g-p-m in their next distribution, have we heard anything from our other > non-Linux, non-HAL-enabled brethren? Having hard dependancies on > something like > g-p-m, which has hard dependancies on HAL, which in turn doesn't (yet) work on > Solaris (I think) sounds like a world of pain it would be really nice > to avoid. HAL doesn't work [yet] on *BSD, either. I have started work on the FreeBSD port, and I hope to have something working by next month. I have fought the "hard HAL dependency" thing in the past, but I gave up. g-v-m shipped as part of the Desktop, and while our users would like it, they understand that HAL is not a trivial undertaking. > > Then there is AIX, HP-UX, IRIX, and every other UNIX someone is building GNOME > for... We have just left those bits out which do not translate to FreeBSD. I hope when HAL is ready, he will see ports like g-v-m and g-p-m work out-of-the-box. However, that still doesn't account for gnomemeeting which we also leave out due to Linux requirements. I'm not sure about the KDE side of the house, but they seem to be more multi-OS (i.e. non-Linux) friendly out-of-the-box. Joe -- Joe Marcus Clarke FreeBSD GNOME Team :: gnome FreeBSD org FreeNode / #freebsd-gnome http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part