Re: gedit ugly under xfce
On 16/07/2014, Tom H <tomh0665@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Bzzzz <lazyvirus@gmx.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Jul 2014 22:34:18 +0400
>> Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> This is … an expected behaviour from any GTK+3 application launched
>>> outside of GNOME. Googling 'GTK3 client-side decorations' will
>>> provide you with all the gory details.
>>
>> That was my conclusion from Franck post (and also checked on
>> a 32bits machine: ze same)
>>
>>> Upstream sees this misfeature as a best thing since buttered bread
>>> was invented [1].
>>> Users thoughts on the matter, are … well, let's sum it up as
>>> 'needs some work' - [2].
>>
>> I think I could suggest another use of the butter for
>> those creeps…
>>
>> Too bad, I loved gedit; any suggestion about quite the
>> same editor w/o uglyness?
>
> Doesn't Mate have a gedit fork?
>
>
At http://mate-desktop.org/ is
"
Pluma
Pluma is a text editor which supports most standard editor features.
It also extends this basic functionality with other features not
usually found in simple text editors. Pluma is a graphical application
which supports editing multiple text files in one window (known
sometimes as tabs or MDI). Pluma fully supports international text
through its use of the Unicode UTF-8 encoding in edited files. Its
core feature set includes syntax highlighting of source code, auto
indentation, and printing support (with print preview). Pluma is a
fork of Gedit.
"
My understanding of a problem with the Mate desktop environment, is
that appliactions have Spanish names, rather than English (or, kind of
English, insofar as gedit is kind of English) names, like Caja, Atril,
Engrampa, etc.
--
Bret Busby
Armadale
West Australia
..............
"So once you do know what the question actually is,
you'll know what the answer means."
- Deep Thought,
Chapter 28 of Book 1 of
"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy:
A Trilogy In Four Parts",
written by Douglas Adams,
published by Pan Books, 1992
....................................................
Reply to: