| 1 |
On Sun, Jun 05, 2011 at 12:41:42PM +0100, Mick wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sunday 05 Jun 2011 12:17:08 Indi wrote: |
| 3 |
> > |
| 4 |
> > If I were driven strictly by aesthetic concerns qt and kde4 |
| 5 |
> > might be my choices, as they can be extremely pleasant to look |
| 6 |
> > at. Heh, reminds me of my ex -- he was very pleasant to look at |
| 7 |
> > (and a huge amount of constant maintenance work) as well. ;) |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> I think that your problem is that you are running ~arch and this comes with |
| 10 |
> frequent updates. These days I'm running stable and my qt, kde or OOo updates |
| 11 |
> are quite infrequent (like twice a year or may be less). |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Twice a year or less, *really*? |
| 15 |
Had no idea the difference between stable and testing was that huge... |
| 16 |
Of course the reason I'm running testing is that typically, when I |
| 17 |
install there are inevitably two or three things I can't live without |
| 18 |
that don't work in stable so I start with the ACCEPT_KEYWORDS fiddling, |
| 19 |
and eventually that snowballs into a level of complexity which |
| 20 |
frustrates me and then I just end up putting "~x86" in make.conf. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Anyway, I do use some gtk stuff as well as wmaker and fluxbox and |
| 23 |
those work (mostly) fine without having to be constantly fooled with. |
| 24 |
Sometimes gtk or vte breaks and I have to resort to urxvt instead of |
| 25 |
my beloved terminator while fixing things, but that's acceptably |
| 26 |
infrequent. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
> I have to admit though that now the mutt can work as a multi-function client I |
| 29 |
> am tempted to reinstall it and give it a another go ... |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Can't beat mutt, at least if you're keyboard-oriented. |
| 33 |
Nothing else comes close. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
caveat utilitor |
| 37 |
♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ |
Archives