1 |
Alan McKinnon wrote: |
2 |
> On Tuesday 04 November 2008 15:36:54 Jorge Peixoto de Morais Neto wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
>>>> I've found that the recent EINA library release for e17 has broken just |
5 |
>>>> about everything. |
6 |
>>>> |
7 |
>>>> Gentoo's overlay system should be simple enough to modify however after |
8 |
>>>> reading the fine manual I am no closer to understanding the appropriate |
9 |
>>>> course of action to create eina as a dependency in the overlay (I've |
10 |
>>>> bugged vapier@g.o to no avail) |
11 |
>>>> |
12 |
>>> Mike is usually pretty quick with these things. |
13 |
>>> |
14 |
>> "Mike"?!, What, Vapier's formal name is "Mike"? |
15 |
>> |
16 |
> |
17 |
> Mike Frysinger - he's a busy man :-) He heads up the gentoo toolchain team, is |
18 |
> a lead kernel dev on the blackfin architecture, recently was (maybe still is) |
19 |
> on the gentoo council. And maintains an e17 overlay. |
20 |
> |
21 |
> Oh, he also has a regular job as well. |
22 |
> |
23 |
Wow. |
24 |
> |
25 |
>> Back to important stuff, is the overlay in good shape (apart from |
26 |
>> this specific problem)? For example, is it compatible with Portage's |
27 |
>> new requirements for Manifest? |
28 |
>> |
29 |
> |
30 |
> Yes, it dumped digests a long time ago and has been manifest only for ages |
31 |
> now. I've been using it for years and supplement it with extra ebuild I find |
32 |
> on gentoo forums or write myself. This is usually modules, itaask, winlist, |
33 |
> etc etc and I keep them in my local provate overlay. |
34 |
> |
35 |
> Quality was always good, mainly because the e17 team were not ripping huge |
36 |
> chunks of code out of libs and putting them elsewhere. So the build process |
37 |
> stayed the same, only the code changed. Remember edb, evoak, med? It was ages |
38 |
> since that level of disruptive change went into svn. Until eina :-) |
39 |
> |
40 |
What's eina? I guess it's been too long since I've updated e17... |
41 |
> I think this is being driven by raster's work on openmoko. Finally, someone is |
42 |
> paying him to work on e17, and he's writing low-level libs to make e17 better |
43 |
> on tiny screens. Looks like a lot pf refactoring is going on, and we all just |
44 |
> have to wit till it settles down. |
45 |
> |
46 |
> |
47 |
>> Also, why are the snapshot ebuilds so horribly outdated? Is it because |
48 |
>> Vapier is too busy to update them or because he just thinks that e17 |
49 |
>> is like Mplayer, a project where the developers actually take care to |
50 |
>> keep the svn code in good shape (only committing working code)? |
51 |
>> |
52 |
> |
53 |
> The snapshot ebuilds are not out of date - the e17 snapshots are :-) |
54 |
> |
55 |
> the team keeps mumbling that "they really ought to do this more often, like |
56 |
> once a month", then carry on doing it once a year... |
57 |
> |
58 |
> |
59 |
>> My computer has some bugs*. I am trying Xfce instead of e17 to see if |
60 |
>> the bugs were e17's fault, but the bugs continue. I wonder if I should |
61 |
>> go back to e17 |
62 |
>> 1) It is *very* fast and *very* lightweight (even when compared to Xfce) |
63 |
>> 2) It is vastly configurable and does things Xfce does not (like, for |
64 |
>> a quick example, remembering per-window configuration, fine tuning |
65 |
>> window borders, and even making windows borderless) |
66 |
>> but |
67 |
>> 1) It is unreleased; users have to compile code from svn. |
68 |
>> 2) Outputs a truckload of text to .xsession-errors. Does it mean that |
69 |
>> the code is full of little problems that cause warnings? Xfce, in |
70 |
>> comparison, only outputs two "assertion failed"s |
71 |
>> 3) Does not seem to have a Trash Bin or a System tray. I care little |
72 |
>> about these, though (and I imagine there are plugins to provide them, |
73 |
>> but I didn't bother to search). |
74 |
>> |
75 |
> |
76 |
> You want a trash bin? No problem: |
77 |
> |
78 |
> http://www.gurumeditation.it/blog/enlightenment/trash/ |
79 |
> |
80 |
Trash? Sounds like you need to get out and use rm more. |
81 |
> |
82 |
> |
83 |
>> Do you think a user who expects a reasonably stable and bug-free |
84 |
>> environment (say, a user who accepts the latest Ubuntu, instead of |
85 |
>> demanding the stability of Debian stable) can rely on e17? |
86 |
>> |
87 |
Yes, I do it everyday. E17 is my primary window manager, and I have come |
88 |
to expect that for the most part, it will be rock solid. There are |
89 |
occasions where it crashes on me, but I've been able to recover every |
90 |
time it's done that. |
91 |
> |
92 |
> No, not in the current state. It was fine till 3 months ago. Users who want |
93 |
> that should be using one of the suse- or debian or ubuntu-derived distro that |
94 |
> run a stable e17 as the primary wm. Those maintainers try hard to use only |
95 |
> workable svn checkouts when building the distro. |
96 |
> |
97 |
Really, what's it like now? I haven't updated E17 in several months... |
98 |
not regretting that choice now though. |
99 |
I occasionally get a crash on E17, but I can always recover it without |
100 |
loosing my X session. |
101 |
> If you use e17 svn code, be prepared to act like a dev. That's what the e17 |
102 |
> team expects, that's how they build the thing currently and that's the price |
103 |
> we have to pay to get to use that wm. |
104 |
> |
105 |
Yes, I remember having to switch to Xfce for several weeks late last |
106 |
year when E17 went to hell in a hand basket... that wasn't really fun. |
107 |
> I myself got tired of eternally fiddling with e and have resorted to using kde |
108 |
> until things settle down... |
109 |
> |
110 |
> |