GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Originally posted by williamwbishop KDE because it could have been so much better, and failed to be.
Nautilus, just because it's memory footprint was bigger than the OS last time I used it, and killed performance.
Ditto on the KDE issue. I'm a minimalist by choice...there's just too much of it. I had it up the other nite and a friend who stopped in thought I went back to Windows
I didn't install Nautilus in Gnome, and I have to say, I like it better that way. There was just too much duplication.
Originally posted by Slack_Master Ditto on the KDE issue. I'm a minimalist by choice...there's just too much of it. I had it up the other nite and a friend who stopped in thought I went back to Windows
I didn't install Nautilus in Gnome, and I have to say, I like it better that way. There was just too much duplication.
You could always go with blackbox in that case, a favourite of mine. Do they still include it with the distro? It's been a while since I installed slack, was probably the second distro I used.
Originally posted by williamwbishop You could always go with blackbox in that case, a favourite of mine. Do they still include it with the distro? It's been a while since I installed slack, was probably the second distro I used.
It's available as an "extra"--I think it's on the 4th CD (I have a store-bought version). I d/l BB from the site.
The choices you get in the distro now are: KDE, Gnome, WindowMaker, and Enlightenment. On installing, I chose WM and immediately compiled and installed the *boxes & Waimea. Can't live without 'em.
Originally posted by Slack_Master It's available as an "extra"--I think it's on the 4th CD (I have a store-bought version). I d/l BB from the site.
The choices you get in the distro now are: KDE, Gnome, WindowMaker, and Enlightenment. On installing, I chose WM and immediately compiled and installed the *boxes & Waimea. Can't live without 'em.
Slack's up to 4 cd's now? Yeesh. I remember when it was one of the slimmest distros.
Originally posted by williamwbishop Slack's up to 4 cd's now? Yeesh. I remember when it was one of the slimmest distros.
Here's the breakdown:
Disk #1--Install CD
Disk #2--The Live Disk/Rescue Disk
Disk #3--Source code
Disk #4--Extra Programs
PS--I love the "live" disk...I foist it upon all of my computer-owning, Windows-running friends to spread the sheer joy of Slack (the distro --we can get into Bob Dobbs later )
Originally posted by vbp6us They've gotta compete some how. The 4 cds probably include some apps, right?
Dunno, but I have a copy of maybe 6(don't remember, didn't write anything besides "recover" on the disk) in my utility CD case that I walk around with at work. Use it mostly for cfdisk, and the like....nothing like being able to cd boot a computer and create 80 different partition types, then connect via network and start an install.
gcc-2.96.x
It was one of RedHat's worst blunders ever, and Mandrake's too, for following along. They would have been much better off sticking with 2.95.x until the 3.x versions stabilized.
Hell, in its fist incarntion (RH 7.0, I believe), it couldn't even compile a kernel.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.