On Sun, Jun 05, 2011 at 12:41:42PM +0100, Mick wrote: > On Sunday 05 Jun 2011 12:17:08 Indi wrote: > > > > If I were driven strictly by aesthetic concerns qt and kde4 > > might be my choices, as they can be extremely pleasant to look > > at. Heh, reminds me of my ex -- he was very pleasant to look at > > (and a huge amount of constant maintenance work) as well. ;) > > I think that your problem is that you are running ~arch and this comes with > frequent updates. These days I'm running stable and my qt, kde or OOo > updates > are quite infrequent (like twice a year or may be less). >
Twice a year or less, *really*? Had no idea the difference between stable and testing was that huge... Of course the reason I'm running testing is that typically, when I install there are inevitably two or three things I can't live without that don't work in stable so I start with the ACCEPT_KEYWORDS fiddling, and eventually that snowballs into a level of complexity which frustrates me and then I just end up putting "~x86" in make.conf. Anyway, I do use some gtk stuff as well as wmaker and fluxbox and those work (mostly) fine without having to be constantly fooled with. Sometimes gtk or vte breaks and I have to resort to urxvt instead of my beloved terminator while fixing things, but that's acceptably infrequent. > I have to admit though that now the mutt can work as a multi-function client > I > am tempted to reinstall it and give it a another go ... > Can't beat mutt, at least if you're keyboard-oriented. Nothing else comes close. -- caveat utilitor ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤
