1 |
On Wednesday 17 February 2010 01:21:22 Mick wrote: |
2 |
> However, the point has been well made by many. KDE4 is not KDE3.x and |
3 |
> with KDE4 you get the full enchilada because that's what the developers |
4 |
> have produced. Since I do not have the ability (or time) to fork KDE4 |
5 |
> into my own flavour I will very much have to make do and be grateful with |
6 |
> what developers care to offer. As I progressively upgrade my hardware all |
7 |
> this aforementioned 'bloat' will no doubt be less of a concern, but as |
8 |
> things are maturing in the Linux land my old laptop has been getting |
9 |
> slower and slower over the years when running X. I can blame this on |
10 |
> Xorg, but the applications themselves are getting <aheam> heavier somewhat |
11 |
> too. |
12 |
> |
13 |
> I wonder if there is enough of a user requirement here for some of us to |
14 |
> knock up a few wiki pages of how to build a slimmer gentoo, choices of |
15 |
> lightweight WMs, desktop apps of choice, etc. |
16 |
|
17 |
The "gentoo wiki" (I can never remember the URL - it's the user maintained |
18 |
one) already has a great many such pages. In particular lxde and xfce4 fly on |
19 |
older hardware and is well received by and large by people wanting lean and |
20 |
mean desktops. The various *box WMs also had decent writeups on getting them |
21 |
running last time I looked. |
22 |
|
23 |
A few eyeballs on those pages and updating them if necessary would not go |
24 |
amiss. Many people would like to have slimmer alternatives to the usual |
25 |
monstrous culprits: firefox, thunderbird, openoffice, evolution. |
26 |
|
27 |
KDE4 does not suit everyone (neither are Ferraris and Toyotas), so while it is |
28 |
important to understand what KDE4 is and what the limits are, and not try to |
29 |
make it something other than what it is, there is definitely room for systems |
30 |
completely devoid of anything from KDE and/or Gnome. |
31 |
|
32 |
-- |
33 |
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |