Re: Gnome2.2 backport and XFree86 4.3 on woody [was R:e XFree86 4.3 in Woody]
On Fri, 2003-08-22 at 10:49, Michael Bennett Cohn wrote:
> On 21 Aug 2003 15:51:54 -0400
> James Strandboge <jstrand1@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > When that was posted on debianplanet, xfree86 was not part of of my
> > backport. After it was, I let people know via the list. I am not sure
> > what you are trying to accomplish here, but I have submitted another
> > article to debianplanet, and when it goes through, I will ask gnome.org
> > to update their link for getting gnome on debian.
> >
> So, it's frustrating to me, when I find that even though the backport seems to work,
> that the installation, when done right, is easy, and that the use of the applications
> themselves is easy...it's frustrating when I find that there is not a set of simple,
> straightforward installation instructions posted anywhere that the people most likely
> to use this backport are likely to go. The average woody/gnome user may end up typing
> gnome + woody into the search engine at debian planet (and they may, then, after reading
> through a lot of posts, chance upon instructions that work for them), but they are unlikely
> to check the debian.user or the debian-gtk-gnome mailing lists to see if there have been revisions.
>
I will admit that there should be an updated page/post-- and I did that
(debianplanet is down now, but hopefully will be up soon). However, the
instructions at debianplanet do work. It says clearly you need xfree86
4.2.1 to work. They just don't mention that now I include the required
xfree86 packages as a convenience to the user. As for xfree86 4.3,
which was the subject you initially responded to, no novice user should
be trying to install packages that aren't even in sid without the help
of a non-novice.
As for the people who have had problems installing the backport, almost
every time it has been because they are using OTHER backports as well.
Somehow my packages get blamed because they are the last to be
installed. The new page at debianplanet will address this.
> As for the Fifth Toe backport issue, it's more of the same. The Fifth Toe website proclaims that
> their product is both stable and constantly changing.
I am not a gnome-fifth-toe developer. I did not write their description
of gnome-fifth-toe. I find the software interesting, so I backported
some of it. I agree that it is constantly changing. I agree that it
MAY be stable taken one application at a time, but when added into my
(much) larger backport, I don't know how stable it is. Therefore I add
the updates from gnome-fifth-toe slowly. My point in the other
paragraphs was simply that with the backport, you get some relatively up
to date gnome-fifth-toe packages. If you want the latest up to date
gnome-fifth-toe, you have everything you need to compile it using the
backport.
> The fact that you are the one who actually did the work is very significant, but it doesn't
> mean that your evaluation of how accessible it is, and how clear your widely-read instructions are,
> is automatically correct. There should be a web page.
http://www.gnome.org/start/2.2/
which has a link to:
http://debianplanet.org/node.php?id=924
Which has instructions which will work (see above). I said previously
that I am submitting a new article to debianplanet that will detail the
instructions and caveats given previously in this thread, and will
request the gnome.org people to update their link. Is this not enough?
> But if you don't want the jerk who sends you all the abrasive questions to be the catalyst
> for actually making your creation usable on a large scale, then you have to either find so
> meone else to do it, or do it yourself.
>
I don't find you questions abrasive, only your off-list emails.
> Thanks for creating the port, thanks for helping me get it working, and thanks for the other
> incidental tech support that has come about as a result of this thread. I hope that you've found
> some restitution against my first angry missive in the knowledge that you added my private email
> address to two public forums without my permission.
Well, you kept talking about how other users would benefit from knowing
the instructions, therefore I took the private exchange public. 'Angry
missive' is a bit of an understatement.
Jamie
--
Email: jstrand1@rochester.rr.com
GPG/PGP ID: 26384A3A
Fingerprint: D9FF DF4A 2D46 A353 A289 E8F5 AA75 DCBE 2638 4A3A
Reply to: