| 1 |
On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 10:09 +0800, W.Kenworthy wrote: |
| 2 |
> I am not a dev, only a user, but who uses this stuff daily - and I can |
| 3 |
> see big problems on the horizon with this for the average user on less |
| 4 |
> than the fastest and latest hardware. I mainly use gnome (but have kde |
| 5 |
> installed), and can attest to the fact that their multi package approach |
| 6 |
> sucks. You get updates that fail and block other packages and you end |
| 7 |
> up with a mixed package and broken gnome (has happened numerous times) - |
| 8 |
> on gnome systems I keep a fluxbox (and a kde on my main desktop) install |
| 9 |
> so I dont get caught with an unusable system. Then there is the fact |
| 10 |
> that updates to gentoo stable usually mean multiple gnome packages |
| 11 |
> updated - rarely is it just one or two packages. Gnome has only a |
| 12 |
> fraction of the packages in kde, but the disadvantages of this from a |
| 13 |
> user point of view are quite plain from experience. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
If you stay plain stable arch and don't switch to ~arch or back you |
| 16 |
should not ever have any problems with gnome. gnome is fine as long as |
| 17 |
you upgrade only. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
But the general concerns regarding large chuncks of ebuilds & |
| 20 |
interdependencies with the lack of 100% dependency control in portage |
| 21 |
(which gives rise to most gnome's problems) were also the things we told |
| 22 |
the KDE team. We did warn them about it, a lot. Gnome was designed to be |
| 23 |
a lot of small chunks from source, KDE just isn't. But it is their |
| 24 |
choice, maybe it works, maybe they'll find out it's a hell anyway in |
| 25 |
practice (updating 300 ebuilds with such a small team to begin with, |
| 26 |
SLOTing, up/downgrading, etc.). |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
- foser |
Archives