[CS-FSLUG] Time to jump ship?

[Timothy R. Butler]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> Fixing a configuration error that I know how to handle is one thing,
> rebuilding half a distribution from scratch is much more complicated.

	Maybe you should build the whole thing. Ever looked at Linux From 
Scratch? :-)

>> 	You seem to like to tweak and play with the system, so I would just
>> make it a goal to take a distribution of some sort and hack on it 
>> until
>> it does what you want. Start with one that is fast and has most of 
>> what
>> you want already -- let's say Mandrake (or Fedora Core 2 maybe). Then,
>> it shouldn't take much to get it to do what you want.
>
> I'll agree with your first two points and I do like to tinker but I 
> preffer to
> do so with graphical tools or a well designed cli tool, xf86config is 
> an
> example of what I would call a cli tool with a poor interface.

	I'd agree. I'm just wondering if your desires will be satisfied by a 
GUI tool. GUI tools, inherently, lock you into a more restrictive set 
of options. While I wouldn't want to live without a GUI, a GUI only 
works if what you want is *exactly* like what the developer wanted to 
do.

>
>> 	Better yet, go with Debian. And really use it -- for at least a month
>> or two as your only distribution. I betcha you wouldn't switch back.
>
> Currently I've finally managed to get Ark to install, so far so good 
> but as
> with Mandrake and SUSE it will be about two days before I start to 
> notice
> things that drive my up a wall. Only way to find out it I will like the
> distribution though is to wait and see.

	I'll look forward to hearing your findings.

> I've used Gnome for extended periods of time before, if Mac OS X is 
> anything
> like Gnome then I won't like it. The problem with Gnome is simply one 
> of
> prefferernce, everything in KDE is well integrated and runs smoothly, 
> Gnome
> to me has always felt like the absolute opposite, I've always regarded 
> it as
> a very unprofessional, hacked together, desktop environment.

	I don't find it that way, actually. What version of GNOME have your 
tried? Ximian's GNOME is the best, but the one in Fedora is quite 
professional too. Everything is aimed at simple elegance. That's what 
the Mac does too. Really, its more of the UNIX way as well: one good 
application for each job. Like the Mac, GNOME aims not to have a 
boatload of options, but rather to think like the user who will use the 
end product. That's why it doesn't have a menu as messy as Konqueror's 
context menu, for example.
> I've never liked switching desktop environments, I tried it for a long 
> time in
> Mandrake 8.2 because I couldn't get any KDE themes but I never liked 
> it. I
> find it hard to deal with inconsistencty (which is why I don't like 
> visual
> basic ;-) ).

	I think Mandrake 8.2 had an early version of GNOME 2, at best, didn't 
it? GNOME 2.6 is a lot more advanced, keep in mind.

	-Tim

- ---------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy R. Butler       Universal Networks      www.uninet.info
==================== <tbutler at uninet.info> ====================
| Christian Portal:      | Have you not learned great lessons |
|      www.faithtree.com | from those  who  braced themselves |
| GNU/Linux News:        | against  you   and   disputed  the |
|            www.ofb.biz | passage with you?   --Walt Whitman |
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
Presently on "Albert" (DP PPC 970 "G5" running at 2.0 GHz)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAkDJLTMACgkQK37Cns9gJ0ijXgCeNIof2GBu3nNdVTRCIRABCnbW
HvUAnRqWPifb6MO5Rmu64v3Fw/06el0N
=++gl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----