On Thursday 26 May 2011 07:45:09 Indi wrote:
> On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 07:40:54AM -0400, Indi wrote:
> > Two 800MB floppies
>
> 800 KB, sorry. Can't even think that small anymore...
> ;)
Too bad, was just about to ask you where you found those back then :)
--
Joost
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 07:40:54AM -0400, Indi wrote:
>
> Two 800MB floppies
>
800 KB, sorry. Can't even think that small anymore...
;)
--
caveat utilitor
♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 07:00:02AM +0200, Walter Dnes wrote:
>
> I don't know how good "exmap" is, but my personal experience is quite
> different. Between Fall 1999 and Summer 2007 I had a Dell Dimension
> with a 450 mhz PIII and 128 megs of *SYSTEM RAM* (no not the video card).
> It was actua
2011/5/26 Mick :
> PS. I'm not sure that Linus is using Gnome. I recall him bitching that the
> Gnome design approach (which unfortunately KDE imitated) was not the right
> direction to evolve linux in.
Offtopic, but... He ditched gnome, then, a couple of years ago, he
ditched kde4. He will for
On Thursday 26 May 2011 05:50:14 Walter Dnes wrote:
> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 07:13:41PM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote
>
> > On Wednesday 25 May 2011 08:46:48 Indi wrote:
> >
> > and have you ever heard of 'code reuse' or 'modularity'?
> >
> > It seems - no.
> >
> > Because KDE itself might
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 07:13:41PM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote
> On Wednesday 25 May 2011 08:46:48 Indi wrote:
> and have you ever heard of 'code reuse' or 'modularity'?
>
> It seems - no.
>
> Because KDE itself might be huge. But once loaded the apps are pretty small -
> because they reu
Volker Armin Hemmann writes:
> This gem is a couple of years old, but still a worthy read:
>
> http://ktown.kde.org/~seli/memory/desktop_benchmark.html
>
>
> Read it. Seriously.
Interesting. I'd like to also see KDE4 values :)
BTW, according to the author, the only real memory usage informati
On Wed, 25 May 2011 22:11:24 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> But many days Neil and Paul can make me look like a blithering idiot :-)
Only with your help :P
--
Neil Bothwick
Why do programmers get Halloween and Christmas confused?
Because oct 31 is the same as dec 25.
signature.asc
Descriptio
Apparently, though unproven, at 19:13 on Wednesday 25 May 2011, Volker Armin
Hemmann did opine thusly:
> Oh - and you should spend some time on Alan's postings. He is not only a
> certified OLD FART, he has some serious first hand, real world experience
> that makes most of the other OLD FARTs
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 07:10:01PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> Apparently, though unproven, at 14:46 on Wednesday 25 May 2011, Indi did
> opine
> thusly:
>
> > For people already running kde it's ok, but for the rest of us
> > it's a bit ridiculous, isn't it?
> > I used to use a few "k" apps
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 07:20:01PM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
>
> Oh - and you should spend some time on Alan's postings. He is not only a
> certified OLD FART, he has some serious first hand, real world experience
> that
> makes most of the other OLD FARTs on this list look like noobs.
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 07:20:01PM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
>
> and have you ever heard of 'code reuse' or 'modularity'?
>
> It seems - no.
>
> Because KDE itself might be huge. But once loaded the apps are pretty small -
> because they reuse code. kmail does not have its own html eng
On Wednesday 25 May 2011 08:46:48 Indi wrote:
> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 10:00:03AM +0200, Walter Dnes wrote:
> > On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 11:31:40PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote
> >
> > > No, I think you need to get real. It's 2011, what did you expect?
> > >
> > Here's what I don't expect. I run
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 06:40:01PM +0200, Hartmut Figge wrote:
> Indi:
>
> > Last I tried it, you can't run much of that stuff without the
> > whole "kdeinit" thing, which is a giant resource hog (relatively
> > speaking, for those of us accustomed to running trim, fast, light
> > systems).
>
>
Apparently, though unproven, at 14:46 on Wednesday 25 May 2011, Indi did opine
thusly:
> For people already running kde it's ok, but for the rest of us
> it's a bit ridiculous, isn't it?
> I used to use a few "k" apps in the 3 days, they were small and
> easily integrated into the system. Now k
Indi:
> Last I tried it, you can't run much of that stuff without the
> whole "kdeinit" thing, which is a giant resource hog (relatively
> speaking, for those of us accustomed to running trim, fast, light
> systems).
If i will try knode, i get this result:
Total: 69 packages (65 new, 2 in new s
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 04:30:02PM +0200, Paul Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 7:46 AM, Indi wrote:
> > For people already running kde it's ok, but for the rest of us
> > it's a bit ridiculous, isn't it?
>
> If he was already using Qt4, it might not have seemed so bad. ;) I
> think much
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 7:46 AM, Indi wrote:
> For people already running kde it's ok, but for the rest of us
> it's a bit ridiculous, isn't it?
If he was already using Qt4, it might not have seemed so bad. ;) I
think much of that list are from Qt4 and its dependencies. Other than
kdelibs, kde-en
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 10:00:03AM +0200, Walter Dnes wrote:
> On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 11:31:40PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote
>
> > No, I think you need to get real. It's 2011, what did you expect?
>
> Here's what I don't expect. I run a tight ship on my machine. I
> currently have gnumeric a
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 11:31:40PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote
> No, I think you need to get real. It's 2011, what did you expect?
Here's what I don't expect. I run a tight ship on my machine. I
currently have gnumeric and AbiWord and libreoffice-bin running uncer
icewm. In order to get "eme
Apparently, though unproven, at 02:17 on Monday 23 May 2011, Bill Kenworthy
did opine thusly:
> Do any of them actually work acceptably in terms of compatibility with
> MSword though? - having a good, lite suit available for the "quick" jobs
> would be nice.
Well, my usual initial retort to MS s
On Sun, 2011-05-22 at 19:41 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> Apparently, though unproven, at 16:38 on Sunday 22 May 2011, Indi did opine
> thusly:
>
> > On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 12:10:01AM +0200, walt wrote:
> > > On 05/20/2011 08:24 PM, Indi wrote:
> > > > On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 12:50:01AM +0200, w
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 11:40:02PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> Apparently, though unproven, at 20:26 on Sunday 22 May 2011, Indi did opine
> thusly:
>
> > On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 08:10:02PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > > Apparently, though unproven, at 16:38 on Sunday 22 May 2011, Indi did
>
Apparently, though unproven, at 20:26 on Sunday 22 May 2011, Indi did opine
thusly:
> On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 08:10:02PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > Apparently, though unproven, at 16:38 on Sunday 22 May 2011, Indi did
> > opine
> >
> > thusly:
> > > It's unfortunate that we don't have small
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 08:10:02PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> Apparently, though unproven, at 16:38 on Sunday 22 May 2011, Indi did opine
> thusly:
>
> > It's unfortunate that we don't have small, fast, light, standalone
> > programs to deal with the formats of word, excel, powerpoint, etc but
Apparently, though unproven, at 16:38 on Sunday 22 May 2011, Indi did opine
thusly:
> On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 12:10:01AM +0200, walt wrote:
> > On 05/20/2011 08:24 PM, Indi wrote:
> > > On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 12:50:01AM +0200, walt wrote:
> > >> For you users of unstable gentoo: the recent updat
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 12:10:01AM +0200, walt wrote:
> On 05/20/2011 08:24 PM, Indi wrote:
> > On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 12:50:01AM +0200, walt wrote:
>
> >> For you users of unstable gentoo: the recent update of 'icu' broke
> >> dozens of packages (as it always does) including libreoffice.
> >>
>
On 05/22/2011 01:03 AM, walt wrote:
I was very disappointed to find a major open-
source project following M$ around like a hungry puppy :(
It needs to. If it's not compatible with M$, people won't use it as much.
On 05/20/2011 08:24 PM, Indi wrote:
> On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 12:50:01AM +0200, walt wrote:
>> For you users of unstable gentoo: the recent update of 'icu' broke
>> dozens of packages (as it always does) including libreoffice.
>>
>> The problem is that libreoffice fails to build if you have bison-
29 matches
Mail list logo
