| 1 |
On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 15:50:00 -0500, Derek Tracy wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> The biggest reason for the reinstall was because in my contant playing |
| 4 |
> around with DE's and WM's trying to find one that I completely liked. I |
| 5 |
> had KDE, GNOME, E17, FVWM, OpenBOX (I think that is it) all on my |
| 6 |
> system. In all of my toying around I found out a lot about myself, for |
| 7 |
> 1 GUI applications make me work slower and FVWM was and is all I need |
| 8 |
> to make me happy. So I could either unemerge KDE GNOME and the rest |
| 9 |
> (which would surely leave all sorts of unneeded libs and things) or I |
| 10 |
> could reinstall. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
emerge -C kde-meta gnome |
| 13 |
emerge depclean -a |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Much easier than reinstalling, and the reason for depclean. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> To me reinstallation sounded a lot easier. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Reinstallation is never easier. All it ever does is hide the issues, you |
| 20 |
never find out how to resolve them. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> That is what I was thinking when I switched to stable..... From what I |
| 23 |
> am seeing either my computer doesn't like stable code or stable does |
| 24 |
> not mean stable anymore. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
It's not about stable code, that is up to the upstream developers. arch |
| 27 |
vs. ~arch is about the stability of the ebuilds, and this is using stable |
| 28 |
in the same way that Debian do; not changing. An arch ebuild is stable |
| 29 |
because it has not changed in, usually, at least 30 days. A ~arch ebuild |
| 30 |
is for testing, it does not mean the program is unstable. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
First Law of Laboratory Work: |
Archives