I think PACKAGES.TXT gives this information.


edit- After posting, I realized that 7z is a SBo software,
and looking for something native to do the same, I found 'isoinfo' from cdrtools package.

My world isn't limited to KDE, but I do prefer it. I've used the other window managers/desktop environments (gnome, xfce, enlightenment, blackbox, and probably others I don't remember) and wasn't sufficiently impressed with their speed. Going back to KDE never felt sluggish to me... and I only recently got a really high end machine, but these tests were done with a much older system. KDE has always been responsive for me. I was actually stuck using XFCE for about 6 months and I was consistently frustrated by it.

But you seem to correlate slowness with QT and I just don't see that. I have transmission and their qt and gtk versions both seem to run the same, although the gtk version is much uglier (IMO).

But montagdude is absolutely correct in that just installing KDE and QT won't result in any real or perceived slowdown unless you decide to actually run them.

Slackware don't provide MATE "from-box".

But it's the default Slint desktop.

1 members found this post helpful.

This person likes to be spoon-fed. Just too lazy to RTFM or too ignorant to find the FM.
In http://ftp.osuosl.org/pub/slackware/...lackware-HOWTO you'll find two relevant sections. In "Hardware Requirements" it says "you'll need almost 9GB for a full default installation". And in "Slackware Space Requirements" you will find the installed size per Slackware package series (A = 608 MB, AP = 511 MB, ... etc).
A lot of those 3752 posts are pure waste of other people's time.

4 members found this post helpful.

LOL I have zero problem recognizing greed but am rather shocked to find that anyone imagines it is restricted to any specific geography. ... plus I always thought ASUS and those others were multi-national corporations based mostly in China. Gee! One learns something new everyday

.... and speaking of something new, how about .m2 over USB ? or old, how about simple usb drive or networked storage?.... or re-selling such an "odious crime" or using it for something else and getting a PC without such constraints?

I'm pretty certain it would be possible to boot to runlevel 3 and write launch scripts to launch X for each and every app that requires it and that would be about as minimalistic as it could get- no Desktop at all. Few do that because Desktops have proven value for most people in most circumstances. In the above case launching several instances of X in parallel would soon defeat any low footprint value is just one of the values of a shared X environment. It is interesting that most compromise to Xfce or at the very least Fluxbox. Extremely few even drop as far back as Blackbox, so isn't footprint and "snappiness' simply a matter of taste, quality of PC, and the Big Kahuna - what we are used to?

TS asked about Slackware. :-) Slackware don't provide slint or another Slack-like distributive. Slackware provide only Slackware. And into Slackware users maybe found and use "from-box" (into current time) only:

twm
fluxbox/blackbox
windowmaker
fvwm
xfce
kde


Into current time World of Warriors of Freedom provide +100500 WM and DE. Such as openbox, IceWM, MATE or Gnome (Slackware don't provide Gnome since of 10.2)

1. The lower, the fatter and more demanding of resources.
2. My choice.
3. Another good WM (and useful/usability, IMHO).
4. Maybe used, only if XFCE not present.

P.S. I don't used tiling-based WM such as dwm. IMHO, this uncomfortable (for me).

Yes, after migration from GTK+2 to GTK+3 this program may be appear as very slow. Use GTK+2, this is will be always actual. :-)

I didn't say slow, I said ugly. GTK-based interfaces have always looked archaic to me... Maybe it's whatever the default theme is, but the default theme with QT apps look fine to me, and I'm not one to go and try and theme my systems.

Pencils of different colors for taste are also different.

In other words, your preferences are not a problem for developers.

P.S. Maybe need set topic title as [SOLVED] ? ;-)

I also said it was my opinion that it was ugly. But I haven't noticed any speed difference between qt and gtk apps, which is what I was getting at.

As I am someone to theme my system, I've found that gtk+2 is the best because no one cares about it anymore and thus it just continues to work. Qt4 and Qt5 are the next best because they can use my gtk+2 themes without too much hassle. Gtk+3 however is the clear loser, not only do they not remotely support gtk+2 themes, they routinely break any theme I find passable every update...

1 members found this post helpful.

GTK+2 4ever!