Re: KDE

[Navindra Umanee <navindra@cs.mcgill.ca>]

Montreal Tue Mar  9 23:07:21 1999

Phillip R. Jaenke <prj@nls.net> wrote:
> them; somebody else did. Raw.. don't ask. That's how I feel after having
> to show my boss KDE. On a machine with 32M. (FYI: KDE eats about, oh,
> 15-20M. And that's just kwm.) If the agony of the total *incompetency* in

If KWM eats 15-20M on your system, then something must really be
fscked up there.

> some of the KDE 1.1 source packages wasn't enough, the intolerable

The .debs should probably preserve namespace by shoving the KDE stuff
somewhere like $KDEDIR (/usr/kde/?) instead of all over the place
(/var/spool/???  please).  Not to mention, the other unsupported KDE
applications expect a $KDEDIR.  I actually think KDE should drop .debs
altogether.  I went straight to tar.gz and I'm much better off.

The GNOME debs are worse and take up /etc/sound, /etc/CORBA,
/etc/paper.config, /etc/mime-magic, /usr/bin/panel and more instead of
something doing something sensible like shoving config files in
/etc/gnome/* and naming GNOME panel /usr/bin/X11/gpanel.

> slowness was more than enough. P90, 32M, IDE, onboard Trio64V2. Not
> exactly optimal KDE machine, aye? ;P

P100, 32M, IDE, ATI Mach 64.  Sorry, no intolerable slowness here.

-N.