The only way you are going to get an *NON-INTRUSIVE* Gnome and have it actually
work half ass is to tell your boy Pat to start building Gnome again. Otherwise
deal with the fact that some of slackwares half ass built packages need replaced
for things to work correctly. IMHO If you read through all of slackwares build
scripts, slackware intrudes on itself more than any gnome project ever will :P

I don't know about "half ass".... I only replace 7 packages when I build gnome and I'd certainly say it's well above working half ass. In fact, I haven't encountered any problems at all, tho I'll admit to not looking very hard. You can even trim that down by a couple if you really wanted to. I'm starting to wonder if anyone even TRIES to build it with as few replaced packages as possible. I'd have to say no. Seems people find the slightest "problem" with a package and then make a judgement call right then and there to go ahead and replace it. Well, after awhile it really adds up. Before you know it, your replacing 20 packages.

That list of replaced packages for gslacky actually looks to be larger than what you'll see on the upcoming Dropline 2.20... So.... Yea... It all depends on what you consider "intrusive".

A newer pango, glib2 and gtk2 is absolutely required for 2.20 else it won't even build. Gnome is a fairly fast moving target and well... Slackware isn't. Your going to run into problems on that front.

I'm with Lufbery. Replace a few as possible and let updates come from Slackware where they should be coming from.

Details please... you're being pretty explicit here in your opinions - but I want to see this corroborated.

Eric

Keep cool, guys.

When I started this thread I actually only wanted to know, what GSlacky will do with my system. The background of my question was that, as far as I understood, some Gnome distributions really turned Slackware into something only loosely related with the stock system, by introducing things like PAM, replacing fundamental libraries etc., without the chance to get back the original system.

If you are not of the kind to install everything from source like the Gentoo folks, then this makes you depend on the Gnome distributor, and imposes the risk that patches from Slackware and your Gnome distro may conflict.

Therefore I was interested in knowing what GSlacky exactly requires in advance.

So, if there's really a problem with "half built" components, I'd kindly ask you to open a new thread for this subject or discuss it with the distribution maintainer. Being the original poster I think it is a bit off-topic, here. Not to offend you, @Stik, and most of your posting fits well here, but you are beyond what I wanted to know.

gargamel

Just like I said previously... Look through Slackwares build scripts.
I guess I shouldn't single out Pat since he does have contributors, but
it don't take long to find packages where things are patched around so
they work with slackware yet if you *REBUILD* the package to work the
way it *SHOULD* it is considered intrusive. I'm not sure exactly who
came up with all this intrusive B.S. but it is getting rather old now
days. Hell we got Slack 12 that comes out and already Gnome *REQUIRES*
newer glib/gtk+2 and various other packages but some for whatever reason
consider that intrusive. Where exactly is the line drawn. Like I've said
a million times, Most of the whiners have no clue what they are talking
about and are lemmings that will follow to a T every word Pat says. What
happened to coming up with ones own conclusion? Maybe instead of crying
*INTRUSIVE* everytime one sees something is rebuilt, why not ask why this
is the case and make a judgement based on that? It seems like the logical
thing to do but then again that is asking quite alot nowdays. Maybe
instead of patching around problems, pat and his contributors should fix
the problems so that the 3rd party contributors don't have to rebuild
said packages in question. But when you have a leader who trusts so few
and is set in his own ways, I doubt that will be happening anytime soon.

Btw... you asked me to tell you which packages I refer to.. Anyone who
is crying *INTRUSIVE* already knows which packages I am refering to. If
not then they have no reason to be complaining.

I wonder why you keep using Slackware at all... surely there are many other distros which include Gnome by default, where there is no single maintainer with a mass of lemmings following him...
You're not doing Dropline any good at all. I looked through your previous posts in this forum and if 70% is mere bashing Slackware, its maintainer and its users, that is a conservative estimate.

You are still evading my question to point to the build scripts where Slackware intrudes on itself, and/or can be considered half-ass. Did you ever try building a distro from scratch? Even with the public downloads of Redhat Enterprise Linux you will fail miserably unless you spend considerable effort determining how to do a build from scratch. And that is a professional paid-for "enterprise" distribution.

Eric

First off, are you making judgement on Dropline merely because I use it
as a desktop? I am sure hoping not. I am not a maintainer and what I say
does not represent the feelings of the desktops maintainers. How you come
to that conlusion I really don't know. Second, I told you already, now for
the third time, go look through the scripts. If people are so hard core on
the fact that these gnome desktops are *INTRUSIVE* but yet have absolutely
no clue as to what is being intruded upon, then why cry intrusive? Or am
I required to list these build scripts to feed the FUD? Like I said, if
you are one of those that are crying intrusive then you know *EXACTLY*
which ones I am talking about. They are actually fairly well known. If
you indeed believe these desktops are intrusive then go look at the build
scripts of the packages and it's dependancies that are being intruded upon
and you will see exactly what I am talking about. If those who are
crying intrusive don't want to take the time to research this then they
need not talk about things they know nothing about. Basically what I am
asking for is *PROOF* of this intrusive behavior but yet it's being turned
upon me to prove why it isn't intrusive. Sorry, do the research.

Far as why I use slackware? No I don't agree with some of the things
that pat does and the community irritates me to no end at times but it is
still one of the if not *THE* best distro out there in my opinion. I have
also stated that in my rants but I guess you overlooked that. My point is
if packages must be rebuilt because things are purposely left out or being
patched around to work for slackware, don't cry out intrusiveness when
things are rebuilt without these workarounds so said programs will work
with slackware. This is not being intrusive, in fact, it totally opposite.
Since when is adding functionality to to anything *Intrusive*?

For the record, Slackware 12 seems to be free of most of what is being
discussed in this discussion. These arguments go back a few distros. Maybe
that will help you in your search for tainted scripts.

Stik .. I used Slack 11 and Slack 12 and LFS .. Could you please just give a example? One script ... cos without it your rants seem a lot unsubstantiated .

@Stik:
1. When asked my question about how intrusive "GSlacky" is, I just wanted to know, which basic components of my Slackware 12.0 standard system it would replace by its own components. This information is important to me, as "official" Slackware patches won't apply to them any longer. If the GSlacky people do a good job, that is not a problem. But the reason, why Slackers tend to follow Pat, is, that we all learned that he's making balanced decisions in order to keep the system stable, robust and consistent, and security fixes and patches appear in time without ever causing any problems. If GSlacky remains, we may learn to pay the same respect to the maintainers of this desktop distribution. But for the time being I'd rather know what's been replaced by some software, because I want to have the chance to take care of such components just in case the actual maintainer does not. To this end, however, I need to know these components.
That's what I meant when I used the word "intrusive": Replacing standard components instead of just adding new ones. Now that I know what is being replaced when I install GSlacky and that the original system can be restored, I decided to try GSlacky some time soon, but not on my main machine.

2. In my experience, Pat V. actually listens, when you point him to some problem. Did you try that?

3. I second the requests of Alien Bob and duryodhan: Provide evidence, give examples. One, at least. You are writing whole novels about people not knowing what they (we) are talking about. Open source is about sharing knowledge. So, please, share your wisdom with us. Or let silence be your friend.

EDIT:
4. I hope I made it clear: My intention was not to offend any of the maintainers of GSlacky or other desktop distributions. There might not be any other chance in order to make things work than to replace basic libraries. But I want to know in advance, what is replaced, in order to prepare my system and a fallback strategy. So if I call GSlacky intrusive, this is not meant to criticise any 3rd party software maintainer for something possibly unavoidable. In other words: "Intrusive" is not a synonym for "bad". Although I would rather avoid intrusive stuff on production machines, currently, until I know that it doesn't do any harm.

gargamel

We are going to release the new GSlacky 2.20.1 the first completely slapt-get compatible!
The easy-way to install apps like Gnumeric! without a complete desktop install.

About non intrusive questions! GSlacky is non intrusive only for Pam and X library!
But this is not a war against Dropline.
GSlacky is based on a work of Gware and Dropline. Without Gslacky doesn't exist, sorry for my English!
We hope to see the Gnome desktop on the future Slackware!

http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/223/schermataov0.png