Ron Johnson wrote:
Perhaps you misinterpreted my message. I clearly said it was my opinion. I didn't mean to imply that gconf could cause your computer not to start.-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 02/10/07 16:27, Joe Hart wrote:Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:The exact same thing can be said of windows. There are a surprising number of problems that can only be fixed in windows using the command line and/or regedit. Many of these fixes come directly from Microsoft.That is one of the reasons I am using Debian right now. The fact that all of the settings are stored in plain text files is a boon. It's also one of the reasons I use KDE instead of Gnome. IMO, gconf is not a good thing.That's a crock, and you'll have to to present solid evidence to convince me to think otherwise. Why? gconf stores data in text files, not (encrypted?) binary files. The lack of gconf does not prevent Linux from booting. I don't even think it prevents GNOME from starting.
If you want to get technical about it, a corrupted file can cause all sorts of probems. One thing that I have had to do in the past was to delete my /home/joe/.kde directory because of all the fiddlng around with my settings I could no longer see the screen.
Funny how it's hard to read black text on a black background.What I mean is if I delete such things as ALL of the files in my home directrory (which is the only directory aside from /tmp that I have write access to), the worst thing that happens is I go back the defaults, and my personal data is gone. You cannot say the same about Windows. That's the difference in the architecture of the systems.
The fact that we have an opportunity to discuss the differences in our desktop environments is a good thing, because in the Windows world I had no choice. Now there's at least six, probably a more and I haven't heard of them. One that I really like is XFCE. Version 4.4 is quite impressive. I read EL17 is also quite good.
Regards, Joe