Am 17.09.2012 21:52, schrieb Lorenzo Cogotti:
> Even the userbase/time spent developing ratio matters. What also matters
> is the interest that a system shows in something, I think it's obvious
> that FreeBSD can't get much attention as a desktop system if no effort
> is put into it. It is not a b
On 18 Sep 2012 09:41, "Wojciech Puchar"
wrote:
>>>
>>> desktop environment" or similar ideas?
>>
>>
>> Tell you what:
>>
>> When you have at least 75% of the user population of FreeBSD agreeing
>> on which window manager we should offer as the default, we can talk
>> about this.
>
>
> so if 76% wo
In message , Wojci
ech Puchar writes:
>>> desktop environment" or similar ideas?
>>
>> Tell you what:
>>
>> When you have at least 75% of the user population of FreeBSD agreeing
>> on which window manager we should offer as the default, we can talk
>> about this.
>
>so if 76% would decide that Free
In message , Wojci
ech Puchar writes:
>That's all true. But do anyone understand why there is still so much
>pressure for every open source OS and specifically *BSD on "default
>desktop environment" or similar ideas?
Tell you what:
When you have at least 75% of the user population of FreeBSD a
Zhihao Yuan wrote:
>As u can see, it's a stand alone app. But the most widely used wifi
>managers are always taskbar applets -- something bound to a specific
>DE. --
There are a number of taskbar applications not bound to a DE (dzen2, mobar,
gkrellm2) which have plugins for managing the kinds
Hi,
On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 10:39:43 +0200 (CEST)
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> >> desktop environment" or similar ideas?
> >
> > Tell you what:
> >
> > When you have at least 75% of the user population of FreeBSD
> > agreeing on which window manager we should offer as the default, we
> > can talk about
desktop environment" or similar ideas?
Tell you what:
When you have at least 75% of the user population of FreeBSD agreeing
on which window manager we should offer as the default, we can talk
about this.
so if 76% would decide that FreeBSD should have KDE included in system -
it means that i
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 09:54:41 +0200 (CEST)
From: Wojciech Puchar
Actually i don't see any real future for wayland and linux. Linux is
already pushed out by *BSD on the professional side, and by
Are you mad?
Have you looked at top500 lately?
As of June 2012, 46
I spent years using Linux before I truly appreciated the key difference between a "desktop
environment" and a "graphical environment". Probably because everyone had to have a
desktop environment.
I define graphical environment as simply X11 and a window manager.
good that you as first one def
Can you perhaps read the whole thread and organise your thoughts into just
one email?
Chris
On 18 Sep 2012 09:09, "Wojciech Puchar"
wrote:
> To be succinct: this is not OSX/Windows. True Unix and Unix clones can
>> be decoupled from a desktop environment enough that forcing everyone
>> to have o
make a GUI application for FreeBSD? You are asking yourself what desktop
environment will work for sure on FreeBSD? There you have it, Blah DE
works just well and is perfectly documented."
use any X toolking you want (well almost, i recommend avoiding Qt) and use
it properly without assuming an
To be succinct: this is not OSX/Windows. True Unix and Unix clones can
be decoupled from a desktop environment enough that forcing everyone
to have one choice for desktop user experience doesn't make sense, and
the fact that there isn't a common GUI development toolkit (GTK, QT,
etc) encourages fr
actually come out of it). I then faced the problem that there are lots
of GUI toolkits, lots of scenarios to take into account, lots of desktop
You cannot change it. There are lots of GUI toolking and none are really
consistent. None are part of FreeBSD and none will.
If you want to write GUI
From a programmer's point of view, GUI is a protocol, a graphical
language. It's true. But users don't care. Users don't care how their
graphical commands are being implemented.
Such users don't use FreeBSD, or at least doesn't have admin rights.
___
Replying more to the Wayland comments, yes..
FreeBSD/NetBSD/OpenBSD need to implement the Wayland `protocol`
because xorg-server development is slowly being killed over time, but
that's the main reason i already frozen package tree, so i will be able to
use Xorg in 5 years or more.
Wayland
want to develop GUI applications on FreeBSD, supporting features as
panel integration, reliable messageboxes and other trivial things, on
other operating systems, that are apparently unavailable on UNIX without
pulling in significant portions of lots of environments.
this make sense. but it is n
regard GUI as a third-party bonus.
This is according to *your* use cases though. There are many of us who
do not put X - or any graphical environment - on our FreeBSD servers.
and there are many of us that do not put any "graphical environment" while
using Xorg, making actually productive one
This idea would precisely serve the purpose of removing this need and
eliminate redundancy of toolkits, when it comes to essential utilities
that FreeBSD would want to provide, like devices automounting,
partitioning (taking advantage of the system features) and so on... but
it's just an idea, of
Hi,
I was wondering about the possibility of FreeBSD to provide an official
supported graphical environment.
UNIX (so FreeBSD) never had "standard graphical environment" or "graphical
environment" at all.
Xorg is standard in FreeBSD and most unices for graphics hardware support.
There are th
Hi,
On Mon, 17 Sep 2012 17:35:40 +0200
Lorenzo Cogotti wrote:
> I was wondering about the possibility of FreeBSD to provide an
> official supported graphical environment.
for taking resources away from FreeBSD itself? I do not see the need
for this as long there is a single item open on the dod
> And then, a modern GUI should take care of Wifi, automount,
No thanks, seperate issues.
> and many
> things can't be done with a single WM. That's why I said "twm is not a
> modern GUI". So far, any questions?
TWM is not a modern window manager, but is small & light, & comes
with X11. I'm ha
On 09/18/12 00:23, Zhihao Yuan wrote:
On Sep 17, 2012 4:04 PM, "Guido Falsi" mailto:m...@madpilot.net>> wrote:
>
> On 09/17/12 21:13, Zhihao Yuan wrote:
>>
>> 1. Maximize graphical user experience by officially implementing Wifi
>> helpers, auto-mounters;
>
>
> A good automounter definite
Again, I think the best thing you can do is find a few people who are
aligned with what you're trying to achieve, sketch together something,
write up a few applets/applications, and get them into a port.
I then think the best thing to do is talk/work with the PCBSD people
to get this stuff integra
On 17 September 2012 10:53, Zhihao Yuan wrote:
> >From a programmer's point of view, GUI is a protocol, a graphical
> language. It's true. But users don't care. Users don't care how their
> graphical commands are being implemented.
>
> Well, let's make it more straightforward. I hope people can ag
On Sep 17, 2012 4:04 PM, "Guido Falsi" wrote:
>
> On 09/17/12 21:13, Zhihao Yuan wrote:
>>
>> 1. Maximize graphical user experience by officially implementing Wifi
>> helpers, auto-mounters;
>
>
> A good automounter definitely does not need a GUI.
> …
> BTW for this case too there is a whole set o
-Original Message-
From: owner-freebsd-hack...@freebsd.org
[mailto:owner-freebsd-hack...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Steffen Daode
Nurpmeso
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 3:51 PM
To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Providing a default graphical environment on FreeBSD
|>
-Original Message-
From: owner-freebsd-hack...@freebsd.org
[mailto:owner-freebsd-hack...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Zhihao Yuan
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 1:54 PM
To: Mike Meyer
Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Providing a default graphical environment on FreeBSD
Il 17/09/2012 22:55, Mike Meyer ha scritto:
> You requested that this work be done. Then you did it again in several
> places, the first one being here:
> [...]
Maybe I did (as you might notice my English is not very good :) ), but I
thought it was clear that I'd like to cooperate in this.
> Wi
On 09/17/12 21:13, Zhihao Yuan wrote:
1. Maximize graphical user experience by officially implementing Wifi
helpers, auto-mounters;
I think your examples are ill conceived.
A good automounter definitely does not need a GUI. What I think of as a
autmounter should just be some kind of backgroun
Lorenzo Cogotti wrote:
>Il 17/09/2012 20:32, Garrett Cooper ha scritto:
>> *gathers breath for really tangential/OT rant*
>>
>>
>> Sounds like we have someone volunteering to write a chapter in the
>> handbook and do some X11 development to make Gnome, KDE, XFCE, LXDE,
>> Fluxbox, [...], or etc
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Steffen Daode wrote:
> |> Hi,
> |> I was wondering about the possibility of FreeBSD to provide an official
> |> supported graphical environment.
>
> What i really miss compared to 4.* and 5.3 (and compared to NetBSD
> and OpenBSD) is that there is a single pack
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Lorenzo Cogotti wrote:
> Il 17/09/2012 20:32, Garrett Cooper ha scritto:
>> *gathers breath for really tangential/OT rant*
>>
>>
>> Sounds like we have someone volunteering to write a chapter in the
>> handbook and do some X11 development to make Gnome, KDE, XFCE
Mike Meyer http://www.mired.org/
mwm?
Why! It's my preferred WM,
part of x11-toolkits/open-motif.
Talk about coincidences!
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsu
Am 17.09.12 17:42, schrieb Poul-Henning Kamp:
> In message , Lorenzo Cogotti
> writ
> es:
>> Hi,
>> I was wondering about the possibility of FreeBSD to provide an official
>> supported graphical environment.
>
> We already do: It's called "X11" :-)
and for the fun of it: CDE has been opensourc
Il 17/09/2012 21:13, Matthias Andree ha scritto:
>
> What is the particular problem? All major toolkits ultimately talk X11,
> and most applications that I have seen will work in any desktop environment.
Working with any desktop environments is different than working well,
taking full advantage
Am 17.09.2012 19:51, schrieb Lorenzo Cogotti:
> Il 17/09/2012 19:26, Adrian Chadd ha scritto:
>> What are you trying to achieve?
>>
>> Are you trying to write a set of utilities for FreeBSD that are GUI in
>> nature? And you'd like to know which toolkit is "blessed" for a
>> consistent, integrated
|> Hi,
|> I was wondering about the possibility of FreeBSD to provide an official
|> supported graphical environment.
What i really miss compared to 4.* and 5.3 (and compared to NetBSD
and OpenBSD) is that there is a single package with a known name
that can be downloaded and unpacked and you h
Am 17.09.2012 17:35, schrieb Lorenzo Cogotti:
> Hi,
> I was wondering about the possibility of FreeBSD to provide an official
> supported graphical environment.
> Currently FreeBSD doesn't provide any standard desktop environment, this
> means that, in a way much similar to Linux, a developer cann
Hi, hackers:
First, I'm not saying that I want an OS forcing you to installs a DE.
If FreeBSD really does this, I'm going to switch to other BSDs :)
The word "default" has nothing to do with "installed by default". It
only means, when we are taking about "the" desktop environment under
FreeBSD, w
Il 17/09/2012 20:32, Garrett Cooper ha scritto:
> *gathers breath for really tangential/OT rant*
>
>
> Sounds like we have someone volunteering to write a chapter in the
> handbook and do some X11 development to make Gnome, KDE, XFCE, LXDE,
> Fluxbox, [...], or etc work better on FreeBSD!
>
If I
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 11:09 AM, Zhihao Yuan wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp
> wrote:
>> In message
>>
>> , Zhihao Yuan writes:
>>
>>>Well, let's make it more straightforward. I hope people can agree with
>>>this: a default, officially supported modern desktop envi
I spent years using Linux before I truly appreciated the key difference between
a "desktop environment" and a "graphical environment". Probably because
everyone had to have a desktop environment.
I define graphical environment as simply X11 and a window manager. That's all
you need to run Fire
On 17 Sep 2012 17:22, "Tom Evans" wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Zhihao Yuan wrote:
> > I definitely agree with this. Sun has a book, "UNIX Essentials
> > featuring the Solaris...", and GUI takes a big part in the book. A
> > default GUI is essential to a modern UNIX. FreeBSD can no
In message
, Zhihao Yuan writes:
>Well, let's make it more straightforward. I hope people can agree with
>this: a default, officially supported modern desktop environment is
>essential to FreeBSD.
No, it is not.
It would certainly be nice to have as an option, but I would hate
to have to deal w
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message
>
> , Zhihao Yuan writes:
>
>>Well, let's make it more straightforward. I hope people can agree with
>>this: a default, officially supported modern desktop environment is
>>essential to FreeBSD.
>
> No, it is not.
>
> It woul
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 10:51 AM, Lorenzo Cogotti wrote:
> Il 17/09/2012 19:26, Adrian Chadd ha scritto:
>> What are you trying to achieve?
> Right now I was interested in creating a desktop oriented automounter,
> in order to experiment with devd (I don't know if something useful will
> actually
Il 17/09/2012 19:26, Adrian Chadd ha scritto:
> What are you trying to achieve?
>
> Are you trying to write a set of utilities for FreeBSD that are GUI in
> nature? And you'd like to know which toolkit is "blessed" for a
> consistent, integrated feel and development environment?
>
>
>
> Adrian
>
R
>From a programmer's point of view, GUI is a protocol, a graphical
language. It's true. But users don't care. Users don't care how their
graphical commands are being implemented.
Well, let's make it more straightforward. I hope people can agree with
this: a default, officially supported modern des
What are you trying to achieve?
Are you trying to write a set of utilities for FreeBSD that are GUI in
nature? And you'd like to know which toolkit is "blessed" for a
consistent, integrated feel and development environment?
Adrian
___
freebsd-hackers@
On Mon, 17 Sep 2012 11:40:33 -0500
Zhihao Yuan wrote:
> GUI is a concept. People can use WM or DE as their GUIs. X11 is not
> usable from a user's point of view, so it's out of the question. So
> far, your statement "Assume X11 _is_ the graphical environment" is
> already nonsense.
As someone who
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 8:35 AM, Lorenzo Cogotti wrote:
> Hi,
...
Replying more to the Wayland comments, yes..
FreeBSD/NetBSD/OpenBSD need to implement the Wayland `protocol`
because xorg-server development is slowly being killed over time, but
unfortunately that work is not slotted by anyon
Il 17/09/2012 18:20, Tom Evans ha scritto:
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Zhihao Yuan wrote:
>> I definitely agree with this. Sun has a book, "UNIX Essentials
>> featuring the Solaris...", and GUI takes a big part in the book. A
>> default GUI is essential to a modern UNIX. FreeBSD can no long
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 11:00:21AM -0500, Zhihao Yuan wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Lorenzo Cogotti
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I was wondering about the possibility of FreeBSD to provide an official
> > supported graphical environment.
> >
> > Currently FreeBSD doesn't provide any standard
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message
>
> , Zhihao Yuan writes:
>>On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
>>> My suggest was 100% serious: Assume X11 _is_ the graphical
>>> environment, pick a toolkit which is written to work with
>>> any
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Lars Engels wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 11:00:21AM -0500, Zhihao Yuan wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Lorenzo Cogotti
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> > I was wondering about the possibility of FreeBSD to provide an official
>> > supported graphical enviro
In message
, Zhihao Yuan writes:
>On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>> My suggest was 100% serious: Assume X11 _is_ the graphical
>> environment, pick a toolkit which is written to work with
>> any window manager, which all good toolkits are, and move on.
>
>You can "as
On 09/17/12 11:14, Lorenzo Cogotti wrote:
Il 17/09/2012 17:42, Poul-Henning Kamp ha scritto:
In message , Lorenzo Cogotti writ
es:
Hi,
I was wondering about the possibility of FreeBSD to provide an official
supported graphical environment.
We already do: It's called "X11" :-)
(sending back
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message
>
> , Zhihao Yuan writes:
>>On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp
>>wrote:
>>> In message , Lorenzo Cogotti
>>> writ
>>> es:
Hi,
I was wondering about the possibility of FreeBSD to provide an officia
In message
, Zhihao Yuan writes:
>On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp
>wrote:
>> In message , Lorenzo Cogotti
>> writ
>> es:
>>>Hi,
>>>I was wondering about the possibility of FreeBSD to provide an official
>>>supported graphical environment.
>>
>> We already do: It's called "X
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Zhihao Yuan wrote:
> I definitely agree with this. Sun has a book, "UNIX Essentials
> featuring the Solaris...", and GUI takes a big part in the book. A
> default GUI is essential to a modern UNIX. FreeBSD can no longer
> regard GUI as a third-party bonus.
This is
Il 17/09/2012 17:42, Poul-Henning Kamp ha scritto:
> In message , Lorenzo Cogotti
> writ
> es:
>> Hi,
>> I was wondering about the possibility of FreeBSD to provide an official
>> supported graphical environment.
> We already do: It's called "X11" :-)
>
(sending back to mailing list due to a mis
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message , Lorenzo Cogotti
> writ
> es:
>>Hi,
>>I was wondering about the possibility of FreeBSD to provide an official
>>supported graphical environment.
>
> We already do: It's called "X11" :-)
How about Wikipedia "graphical envir
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Lorenzo Cogotti wrote:
> Hi,
> I was wondering about the possibility of FreeBSD to provide an official
> supported graphical environment.
>
> Currently FreeBSD doesn't provide any standard desktop environment, this
> means that, in a way much similar to Linux, a d
In message , Lorenzo Cogotti writ
es:
>Hi,
>I was wondering about the possibility of FreeBSD to provide an official
>supported graphical environment.
We already do: It's called "X11" :-)
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956
Free
Hi,
I was wondering about the possibility of FreeBSD to provide an official
supported graphical environment.
Currently FreeBSD doesn't provide any standard desktop environment, this
means that, in a way much similar to Linux, a developer cannot know in
advance which GUI will be available on the sy
65 matches
Mail list logo
