Re: Goodbye GNOME, Hello XFCE
On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 11:12:37AM +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Fr, 2013-12-06 at 14:02 +0400, Reco wrote:
> > I disagree. My .xsession-errors does not contain similar warnings.
>
> What DE do you use? It's new to me that there aren't those issues
> outside GNOME. There's nothing the other DEs have to fix, the bad design
> is from GTK/GNOME.
Xfce, Debian stable. I just stay clear of anything that's linked against
libgconf.so.
Been using the thing since etch days. About the only thing I've changed
in my setup is xfwm4 → compiz → openbox replacement that I did between
squeeze and wheezy.
> > > but GTK also does
> > > cause really serious issues, if you e.g. launch a GNOME editor with root
> > > privileges, the Microsoft like config thingy's privileges change to root
> > > and GNOME apps don't work for the user anymore.
> >
> > That's bad for the unfortunate user indeed. But that's not the GTK+-2
> > problem, that's gconf problem (probably combined with misconfigured sudo
> > - i.e. without sudo always_set_home).
>
> Issues happen not with Non-Gnome apps, but also when using su for GNOME
> apps, so sudo is completely irrelevant. Also completely independent from
> the used distro.
So, to reproduce it, I need to do something like:
$ gnome-terminal
$ su -
Password:
# gnome-terminal
Right? But that sequence does not break anything here.
Now, if I'd used 'su' instead of 'su -' - now that could break the
things indeed.
> > > This are not Xfce, KDE
> > > etc. bugs and they are also not Debian related, this is caused by
> > > GTK/GNOME upstream's ignorance. GTK and GNOME are crap. Very likely that
> > > even GNOME doesn't continue using GTK, LXDE for good reasons switches
> > > from GTK to Qt.
> >
> > GNOME project plans to ditch GTK+-3? That's interesting, to say the
> > least. Have you got any proof of that?
>
> No transparency, no official statements, no evidence for it, but if you
> run the releases from upstream and not outdated versions from Debian,
> you'll notice the evolution of GTK and that it's at a dead end.
Or, they just implemented the stuff in GTK they want, got rid of anything
they don't need, and are merely fixing current bugs.
They did the same in the past, back it was called GTK+-2.8. Didn't hurt
anyone.
Reco
Reply to: