On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 07:04:25AM +0200, Paulo Pinto wrote:
> Am 15.09.2013 01:35, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
> >On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 17:38:52 +0200
> >"Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 06:57:23 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> >>>Windows and most of the other distros at the time offered: the ability to install a bare minimum system that could still function without *requiring* X11
> >>
> >>
> >>oh god X11 was too brutally slow to use on an older computer anyway. Windows 95 was actually fast.
> 
> 
> An interesting anecdote.
> 
> At the begining of my UNIX days, it was a pleasure to use the usual set of APIs, which tend to be less convoluted than on Windows.
> 
> Then I started looking into X11 programming with Xlib and Motif, and could not believe that they managed to make it even more complex than any other desktop graphics programming API!
[...]

Once, in college, I had the totally hare-brained idea of *printing* out the Xlib documentation. Through the department's printer service. It came out as a stack of paper 6 *inches* thick (you do the math as to how many pages that is), which I still have today for posterity. :-P


T

-- 
If it breaks, you get to keep both pieces. -- Software disclaimer notice

On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 11:06:37AM +0100, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> On Sep 15, 2013 12:50 AM, "Nick Sabalausky" < SeeWebsiteToContactMe@semitwist.com> wrote:
[...]
> > That's pretty nice. I'm still not *quite* linux-savvy enough to know what I'm doing with chroots (I know about them, but I've never actually set one up, and I'd have to look up how to do it.)
> >
> 
> It doesn't require much to set one up really.  :)
> 
> I've got a few scripts that builds chroots for Debian testing and unstable for x86, x86_64, X32, and ARM environments (the latter uses QEMU emulation mode to run the binaries on my system).
[...]

Debian even has a package (debootstrap) for installing a functional base system onto a filesystem subtree (it's actually used by the installer to initialize a mounted drive that will be serving as root filesystem). It can't get any more convenient than that! :) (Though granted, a full base system install is probably total overkill if all you're looking for is a chroot jail for a single application.)


T

-- 
There are three kinds of people in the world: those who can count, and those who can't.

On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 14:10:58 UTC, Ivan Kazmenko wrote:
> On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 19:48:18 UTC, Namespace wrote:
>> Just out of interest.
>>
>> I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I will try this evening VisualD.
>
> FAR Manager's editor with Colorer plugin.  The upside is that it's a unified (albeit minimalistic) interface for every language I decide to write in.

I thought I was the only one :)

On 2013-09-14 11:43, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

> I've tried Total Commander on Windows, which is another program modeled
> after Norton Commander. It's probably the only file manager in the
> world that's even less to my taste than OSX's Finder. However, I do
> keep it around because its multiple-file-renaming tool is freaking
> awesome.

Finder in Mac OS X sucks. In the next version of Mac OS X it's going to get tabs, finally. Actually who cares, I'm already using Path Finder since many years:

http://www.cocoatech.com/pathfinder/

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

15-Sep-2013 18:48, Vladimir Panteleev пишет:
> On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 14:10:58 UTC, Ivan Kazmenko wrote:
>> On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 19:48:18 UTC, Namespace wrote:
>>> Just out of interest.
>>>
>>> I use Sublime 2, Notepad++ and as IDE currently Mono-D. But I will
>>> try this evening VisualD.
>>
>> FAR Manager's editor with Colorer plugin.  The upside is that it's a
>> unified (albeit minimalistic) interface for every language I decide to
>> write in.
>
> I thought I was the only one :)

I use it more as a better console ;)

-- 
Dmitry Olshansky

Am 15.09.2013 10:48, schrieb Jonathan M Davis:
> On Sunday, September 15, 2013 10:22:13 Paulo Pinto wrote:
>> Am 15.09.2013 09:50, schrieb Jonathan M Davis:
>>> ...
>>>
>>> >From what I've heard, Kubuntu is one of the worst KDE distros out there,
>>>> but I>>
>>> haven't done much with it, and I've never done much with debian-based
>>> distros in general. These days, I use Arch.
>>>
>>> - Jonathan M Davis
>>
>> Mandrake and SuSE were the best ones for KDE.
>>
>> Mandrake is now gone. Mandriva does not count.
>>
>> SuSE screwed themselves by making patent agreements with Microsoft, thus
>> moving the community away from them.
>>
>> So nowadays I think even with its second class treatment, Kubuntu still
>> tends to be the best option for most KDE users that want proper
>> mainstream hardware support on their distributions.
>
> As I understand it, a large portion of OpenSuSE users are KDE users rather
> than gnome users, and I've almost never heard anyone say anything good about
> Kubuntu as far as KDE goes. Almost everyone who talks about it seems to talk
> about how poor a KDE distro it is. I used to use OpenSuSE, and I really have
> no complaints about their support of KDE. They actually seem to really go the
> extra mile to make sure that everything is well integrated and works. And
> while there were certainly complaints about their patent agreements with
> Microsoft, I'm not aware of much negative actually coming from that. I'm not
> even sure that any of those are still in effect, particularly since SuSE was
> sold. I'm quite surprised to see someone claiming that Kubuntu is better than
> OpenSuSE with regards to KDE.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis
>

I did not say that.

I said that because of the Microsoft agreement, many SuSE users left the distribution and went elsewhere.

Additionally, that (K)Ubuntu happens to have better hardware support than SuSE, specially in terms of laptops.

SuSE used to be the home of many KDE and Qt developers, and had a huge community in Europe, specially in Germany, its home country.

Nowadays you see them trying to sell themselves together with SAP for enterprise deployments and I have no clue how good the KDE support still is.

--
Paulo

Am 15.09.2013 12:09, schrieb Iain Buclaw:
>
> On Sep 15, 2013 12:55 AM, "Nick Sabalausky"
> <SeeWebsiteToContactMe@semitwist.com
> <mailto:SeeWebsiteToContactMe@semitwist.com>> wrote:
>  >
>  > On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 11:31:44 +0100
>  > Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw@ubuntu.com <mailto:ibuclaw@ubuntu.com>> wrote:
>  > >
>  > > Some manufacturers even actively work against Linux at the hardware
>  > > level.
>  > >
>  > >
> http://linuxologist.com/02hardware/even-more-incriminating-evidence-in-the-foxconn-debacle/
>  > >
>  >
>  > Yea. I don't know this will just turn out to just be more Palladium-like
>  > anti-MS FUD, but UEFI really worries me. To the point where I'd be very
>  > hesitant to buy any computer with Win8 pre-installed. (Not that I'd
>  > want to pay the MS tax anyway for an OS I'd immediately wipe off of the
>  > HDD.)
>  >
>
> I've actually taken a rash decision and won't buy another x86/x86_64
> device again (going full ARM in the next years once my current kit
> reaches it's end of life).
>
> Regards
> --
> Iain Buclaw
>
> *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
>

Using a Raspberry Pi as desktop?

Am 15.09.2013 16:24, schrieb H. S. Teoh:
> On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 07:04:25AM +0200, Paulo Pinto wrote:
>> Am 15.09.2013 01:35, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
>>> On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 17:38:52 +0200
>>> "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Saturday, 14 September 2013 at 06:57:23 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
>>>>> Windows and most of the other distros at the time offered: the
>>>>> ability to install a bare minimum system that could still
>>>>> function without *requiring* X11
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> oh god X11 was too brutally slow to use on an older computer
>>>> anyway. Windows 95 was actually fast.
>>
>>
>> An interesting anecdote.
>>
>> At the begining of my UNIX days, it was a pleasure to use the usual set
>> of APIs, which tend to be less convoluted than on Windows.
>>
>> Then I started looking into X11 programming with Xlib and Motif, and
>> could not believe that they managed to make it even more complex
>> than any other desktop graphics programming API!
> [...]
>
> Once, in college, I had the totally hare-brained idea of *printing* out
> the Xlib documentation. Through the department's printer service. It
> came out as a stack of paper 6 *inches* thick (you do the math as to how
> many pages that is), which I still have today for posterity. :-P
>
>
> T
>

I can imagine, I remember the stack of books O'Reilley used to sell.

The department guys were very happy with you I guess. :)

--
Paulo

On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 03:44:59 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> As for Gnome 3, I don't know what they're smoking. It's one of the most
> bizarre DEs ever

After I have switched to Gnome Shell I can't use any other desktop manager comfortably. It is truly revolutionary, main problem is that people almost never want revolutions and mostly stick to their habits. Ones that suffer badly with Gnome Shell :)

Am 15.09.2013 18:50, schrieb Dicebot:
> On Sunday, 15 September 2013 at 03:44:59 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>> As for Gnome 3, I don't know what they're smoking. It's one of the most
>> bizarre DEs ever
>
> After I have switched to Gnome Shell I can't use any other desktop
> manager comfortably. It is truly revolutionary, main problem is that
> people almost never want revolutions and mostly stick to their habits.
> Ones that suffer badly with Gnome Shell :)

This applies to programming languages as well. :)