Gnome and Slackware.
Linux kernel 2.6, Slackware 12.0
Hi: I am browsing the package list for Slackware 13.1, accessible through Slackware.com>Get Slack, and I see the package containing the Gnome desktop enviroment nowhere in the list. Should I conclude Gnome isn't part of the Slackware distributions? Thanks in advance. |
Yes, that is what you should conclude :)
Third party Slackware Gnome packages are available from a number of projects, including, but not limited to:Edit: It seems gware.org don't have a 13.0 or 13.1 version of Gnome available. |
Gnome is no longer a part of Slackware.
If you prefer GNOME, there are teams online producing GNOME for Slackware. Here are a few places to look: http://gnomeslackbuild.org http://www.droplinegnome.net/ http://www.gware.org/ |
Thanks. "Gnome is no longer a part of Slackware". This is in accordance with what I read in an post by an LQ member (dated 2004): "you'll find gnome in disc 2 of your slackware 9.1 distro". But then, if I could get slack 9.1 (or 9.0) I would have the official slackware release.
Good bye. |
There's also GSlacky (go to www.slacky.eu and click on "GSlacky").
|
As previously mentioned Gnome is not a part of Slackware. I would strongly recommend gnomeslackbuild, it is an excellent version of Gnome for Slackware. I've used GSB; it does not replace many standard Slackware files.
http://gnomeslackbuild.org/ |
I do not very well know how to say this after so many posts received. My primary purpose was (and is) to get rid of KDE and use something else in its stead. Gnome was the first desktop environment (DE) I used when I discovered linux. Now, gnome not being part of the slack distros I must fall back on software not officially approved by Slackware. Although I know slackbuilds is currently kind of an official slack repository and its name appears in the slack page I made up my mind not to use gnome (and certainly not KDE).
I will try the DE I have in my 12.0 discs besides KDE: xfce. It'll be a relief for my machine, because the other two are real resource-eating monsters. Regards. |
I don't run or even install KDE. I run everything in XFCE, and I don't have any problems.
|
Slackware is maintained by a small group of people, and it's Pat's decision alone as to what gets included in a release. Pat made the decision a few versions ago to remove GNOME, as it became a real bear to build and maintain. He has said that third-party GNOME packages, such as GSB and Dropline, offered a more complete desktop than what was included in official Slackware releases anyhow.
Although GNOME isn't officially supported by Pat and the crew, you can get help here since the GSB guys are active in this forum, as well as other GSB users. |
Quote:
Stf92, if your goal is a fast and light desktop, try just OpenBox combined with Tint2. Or LXDE. Both are faster and lighter than Xfce, which is in turn faster and lighter than both GNOME and KDE. |
@rmjohnso: I'm glad to know it. And I will begin to study the doc needed to set it running. Regards.
@Cheesesteak: thank you for letting me know something about Slack's inner things. Quote:
@dugan: I'll try them. Although speed and lightness necessarily come at the expense of some other things. Independently of which is the desktop environment I shall use at present, I think I have here enough information to make a good decision in the near future. Thanks a lot for your kind replies. EDIT: rereading, I now think the word bear here is self-explanatory. |
I run GSB-2.26 on my laptop with 13 and one of my desktops is GSB-2.30 on 13.1. For my laptop I just omitted the KDE packages which will still install fluxbox and XFCE, then I used the GSB net-install to get GSB going. It's very well documented and works great.
|
Thanks. If by documentation we understand the GUI help system, I find KDE very poorly documented. It almost seems as if they were taking one's leg.
But I lack the reference of having used other desktop environments. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
But why in the website and not in my CDROMs? The documentation for say, a DVD aauthoring tool GUI app, cannnot be more extensive than that for cdrecord or mplayer, because of the limited set of parameters the user is expected to control in a GUI app.
However, I only have to type 'man cdrecord' or 'man mplayer' and I have there all I, as a user, need to know about cdrecord or mplayer. Or I may even do 'info <prog_name>' and there I have a more friendly/complete user's guide. It is this what I am really complaining about. And I'll give you that I have an internet conexion and can enter the website. It is almost certain I'll get information about newer versions of the software and not about the version installed in my machine. I.e., with the soft and the doc both in a local storage medium, mine turns into a self-contained system. This letter may constitute a digression from the thread subject. If that is the case, I beg your pardon. Regards. |
Quote:
|
I see my signature is being fruitful. Thanks for your link, pwc101.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:05 AM. |