Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 7th Jul 2005 14:41 UTC
Gnome The second point release of the stable 2.10.x branch of GNOME is now officially released. This release has seen continued work to eliminate memory leaks, plain bugs and in general improve and polish the stable series of GNOME. Source: bindings, desktop, platform.
Order by: Score:
?
by Anonymous on Thu 7th Jul 2005 14:58 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Stable ?

Reply Score: 0

Re: ? (Question about stable/devel).
by victorhooi on Thu 7th Jul 2005 15:10 UTC
victorhooi
Member since:
2005-06-30

heya,

Yes, it's stable.

The Gnome releases follow the Linux Kernel versioning scheme, where stable releases are given even minor numbers (eg 2.8), whilst development releases are given odd minor numbers (eg 2.9).

You can read Jeff's blog entry and discussion about it here:

http://www.gnome.org/~jdub/blog/projects/gnome/1095703226

Anyway, I'm off to try this. Seems mostly bugfixes, but might be worthwhile to install once GSB gets Slackware packages up for it.

cya,
Victor

Reply Score: 5

v yeah stable.
by Anonymous on Thu 7th Jul 2005 15:10 UTC
v ?
by Anonymous on Thu 7th Jul 2005 15:15 UTC
RE: ?
by Anonymous on Thu 7th Jul 2005 15:16 UTC in reply to "?"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Because even version numbers are stable releases for all computer users and odd version numbers are releases for testers and developers.

Reply Score: 2

Hope it fixes my bug...
by Anonymous on Thu 7th Jul 2005 16:55 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I hope it fixes the bug I get with two popups upon every log in about No volume control elements and/or devices found. This is without having a sound card that is supported or even installed on the system. I've done everything known to man to disable all Sound Events and Sound in general all to no avail. I do have a bug report in to Bugzilla but still no resolution as of yet.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Hope it fixes my bug...
by mint on Thu 7th Jul 2005 18:14 UTC in reply to "Hope it fixes my bug..."
mint Member since:
2005-07-06

You can't see it, but the "Volume Control" panel applet is trying to be loaded.

You can fix that by creating a new panel and moving all of your applets and things to that, and then delete the old panel.

Hope that helps.

Reply Score: 1

?
by Anonymous on Thu 7th Jul 2005 17:33 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Right, I am well aware about even versions and uneven versions. But yet a theoretical stability just because of numbers doesn't mean that the theoretical stable version of GNOME is really stable. For example I find same bugs in exactly this stable version of GNOME that I also found in previous unstable versions of GNOME. So stable and unstable doesn't really make a big difference, specially when it comes for GNOME related things.

Reply Score: 0

The basic system
by smitty_one_each on Thu 7th Jul 2005 18:11 UTC
smitty_one_each
Member since:
2005-07-07

Is noticeably faster on my Gentoo system after the latest emerge -u world.
I'm not running anything too interesting, though.

Reply Score: 1

RE: The basic system
by Anonymous on Fri 8th Jul 2005 13:36 UTC in reply to "The basic system"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Gentoo don't have it yet !?!

Reply Score: 0

v Gnome bloat and is slow
by Anonymous on Thu 7th Jul 2005 19:01 UTC
v RE: Gnome bloat and is slow
by Anonymous on Thu 7th Jul 2005 19:09 UTC in reply to "Gnome bloat and is slow"
v RE[2]: Gnome bloat and is slow
by Anonymous on Thu 7th Jul 2005 19:14 UTC in reply to "RE: Gnome bloat and is slow"
RE[2]: Gnome bloat and is slow
by Anonymous on Thu 7th Jul 2005 20:04 UTC in reply to "RE: Gnome bloat and is slow"
Anonymous Member since:
---

my DE only uses 128megs on startup

128 megs?! KDE 3.4.1 is about 80megs with kopete and kmail running... where has my bloat gone to?!

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: Gnome bloat and is slow
by Anonymous on Fri 8th Jul 2005 01:46 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Gnome bloat and is slow"
Anonymous Member since:
---

These numbers are meaningless without context. And as far as I know, there is no good way to reliably come up with really solid values by looking at top, as the shared memory is just impossible to track from what top gives you.

Here's what I do on my FC4 box. I edit /etc/sysctl.conf and add:

vm.swappiness = 0

(This tells the kernel to avoid paging to disk unless it really has to, even if it thinks that freeing ram for disk caching would help.)

I then reboot and add:

mem=64M to the boot string. Let the systyem come up. Log into the desktop. Kick out to a text console. Log in and run "top".

Take the initial 65536k you allocated on boot and add the swap used value. Subtract the cached value and the buffer value. The resulting number is the best number you'll get for the amount of memory your kernel and other programs are using, exclusive of disk caching.

Bascially, you've got to force the system to make do with minimal resources to really find out what the requirements are.

On my current FC4/Gnome system, the whole kit and kaboodle comes to about 96M.

BTW, do not forget to take the "vm.swappiness = 0" out of /etc/sysctl.conf or your future performance will suffer.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Gnome bloat and is slow
by Mystilleef on Thu 7th Jul 2005 19:18 UTC in reply to "Gnome bloat and is slow"
Mystilleef Member since:
2005-06-29

I'm sorry both C and C++ are ewil programming languages. And both are horrible for designing and authoring desktop applications.

That been said, GTK+ is a fabulous well documented object oriented graphic user interface API. If you are not convinced, you only need to take a look at the number of applications written with it. Go ahead. Have a look at sourceforge, freshmeat, gnomefiles and friends. If you are still not convinced, you need help.

The fun with GTK+, or programming in general, begins when you use dynamic, expressive and productive high level bindings like Python. The PyGTK binding is particular is a wonder. The productivity gains is nothing short of amazing. I can now actually focus on iterative testing, prototyping and design, as opposed to fiddling with constructs, syntax, semantics and long compilation times ending with compiler errors.

The GTK+ team have done an astounding job. After playing with the likes of Glib and GObject, you'd wonder why we need bloated and complex C++. No offense, but only masochists code desktop applications in C and C++, given how mature the higher level dynamic bindings are for GTK+, especially Python.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Gnome bloat and is slow
by Anonymous on Thu 7th Jul 2005 19:36 UTC in reply to "RE: Gnome bloat and is slow"
Anonymous Member since:
---

I think design an language by the programmer isn't the programmer's role and they havn't this time and ability(and what about if they lost the interesting?).the c++ is a general abstract and be support in compiler ,but what's the gtk+and gobject?They can only reinvent the wheel and less be suit in other use


the c++ take almost 20 years's evolution and more mature and have standard.what the gtk+ and gobject can do.

don't see any big property soft use the python binding

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: Gnome bloat and is slow
by Anonymous on Thu 7th Jul 2005 20:03 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Gnome bloat and is slow"
Anonymous Member since:
---

First, before debating about programming language, try to be understood by improving your written english skill. It is barely readable.
Second, do you asume that gtk is purely object oriented ?
Sure C isn't semantically ans conceptualy an OOL butbut GObject, while being written in C, implements every OO concepts you have in a "real" OOL : classes/instances, inheritance, polymorphism, interfaces ...
Sure, the syntax in pure C isnt as intuitive and integrated as in languages like C++ or Java .. But, as said before, there are bindingq for C++ (gtkmm), for java (java-gnome), for C# (gtk#) and many others ...(hum python and ruby ;) )
So i dont see your point. Don't repeat blindly what some stupid Qt/Wx/Wathever zealots are saying.

Reply Score: 0

RE[4]: Gnome bloat and is slow
by cm__ on Thu 7th Jul 2005 21:18 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Gnome bloat and is slow"
cm__ Member since:
2005-07-07

> First, before debating about programming language,
> try to be understood by improving your written
> english skill. It is barely readable.


Funny you would complain about his written English. Even as a non-native speaker I detect seven mistakes in the following two sentences:


> Second, do you asume that gtk is purely object oriented ?
> Sure C isn't semantically ans conceptualy an OOL
> butbut GObject, while being written in C,
> implements every OO concepts you have in a "real"
> OOL : [...]

SCNR.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Gnome bloat and is slow
by Anonymous on Fri 8th Jul 2005 10:35 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Gnome bloat and is slow"
Anonymous Member since:
---

But even with the mistakes it was readable. The other message just didn't parse.

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: Gnome bloat and is slow
by Mystilleef on Thu 7th Jul 2005 20:30 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Gnome bloat and is slow"
Mystilleef Member since:
2005-06-29

I did not really understand your reply. But from what I can decipher, you seem to be errorneously comparing a programming language to an API framework.

C++ is a programming language. GTK+ is a GUI API framework. Glib is an API framework for C that provides useful utility and wrapper functions not available in C, but found in mordern languages. GObject is an object-oriented API framework founded on Glib. GTK+ is the object-oriented GUI API framework founded on both Glib and GObject.

Now, the difference between writing an application in a pure language like C++ as opposed to using an API like Glib/GObject/GTK+, is like the difference between night and day. You are eons more productive using a specialized, robust, well-tested library written by talented and experienced hackers and experts, than rewriting everything from scratch in C++.

Also API programming is totally different from pure C++ programming. For some weird reason, you seem to think GTK+ is programming language, when it is really a GUI framework designed with portability and easy bindings to higher level languages, like Python. These are things C++ majorly suck at, when compared to C.

In addition, C++ can't do anything remarkable that can't be done in any other language, talk less of an API like GObject or GTK+. In fact, C++ does not have a standard GUI library. So it can't do what GTK+ can. Except you are silly enough to rewrite a GUI library from scratch. C++ is also a horrible, complex and distasteful programming language to weild.

I seen more C++ project go sour than I've witnessed for any other language including C. I can count the number of large successful C++ projects on both hands. So much for C++ evolution and maturity that in this day and age we still have to battle memory corruptions, leaks, overflows, underflows, and an assorted array of security vulnerabilities both known and unknown. My friend, both C and C++ suck! However, there are some very well designed and powerful APIs that can bring life back to those languages, and GTK+ is one of them.

Finally, in the free software world, we don't judge the success of a project by how many big proprietary softwares use its product, but rather by how many free software products are designed and authored using the product. With that in mind, the link below points to fabulous applications writing in Python using the GNOME technologies and GTK+.

http://pygtk.org/applications.html

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Gnome bloat and is slow
by Anonymous on Thu 7th Jul 2005 20:36 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Gnome bloat and is slow"
Anonymous Member since:
---

> the link below points to fabulous applications writing
> in Python using the GNOME technologies and GTK+.

Yeah, why not writing applications in Basic, Bash or some line interpreted script language or something. Hey, we seek for professional stuff and not a collection of different languages. I and probably most others here don't want to have 100mb of Mono, 50mb of Python, 50mb of Ruby, 50mb of Java installed only to run the one or other application that depends on it. I think the majority of us readers and users of GNOME want to have a consistent Desktop written throughly in one language. The bindings or language stuff can be an addition ontop of it for those who want it. I think exactly this is one of the main concerns in the head of many people. The more they hear people like you talking about Python, Ruby, Mono, Java, <add whatever here> the more you do to get rid of people. Atm as it looks like GNOME is more of a construction lot for experiments than a serious Desktop Environment.

Reply Score: 0

RE[5]: Gnome bloat and is slow
by Mystilleef on Thu 7th Jul 2005 21:01 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Gnome bloat and is slow"
Mystilleef Member since:
2005-06-29

So you'd rather have buggy, security infested, segfaulting C/C++ applications than have an application written by someone who actually had time to do extensive testing, design and prototyping?

Users could care less what programming language is used to write the app. Only geeks and zealots waste their time on such nonesense. If the program rocks, I don't care if I need to install 1GB of libs to use it.

Take a look at games for example, users regularly install gigabytes of games, writing in different languages with different third-party statically linked libraries. Do they care what language the game is written in? Of course not!

What's the point of writing a program in C/C++ that will take years of development time to reach maturity, stability and security and that the developers expend ungodly amount of resources on? If that's your idea of a stable desktop, I don't share your dream.

Just take a look at the release notes for this GNOME release. And see how many memory leaks alone were plugged. That's what you get for using C/C++. Memory leaks, security problems and pain. Like I said, in this day and age, coding desktop apps in C/C++ is reserved for masochists.

If you are a developer looking to write apps for GNOME or just to play, have a look and PyGTK, gnome-python and gnome-python-extras. You'll examples of people writing web browsers in under hundred lines of code. Try that with C/C++.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Gnome bloat and is slow
by MORB on Fri 8th Jul 2005 09:13 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Gnome bloat and is slow"
MORB Member since:
2005-07-06

If you are a developer looking to write apps for GNOME or just to play, have a look and PyGTK, gnome-python and gnome-python-extras. You'll examples of people writing web browsers in under hundred lines of code. Try that with C/C++.

http://developer.kde.org/~larrosa/tutorial/p4.html

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Gnome bloat and is slow
by rhavyn on Thu 7th Jul 2005 21:43 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Gnome bloat and is slow"
rhavyn Member since:
2005-07-06

Yeah, why not writing applications in Basic, Bash or some line interpreted script language or something. Hey, we seek for professional stuff and not a collection of different languages. I and probably most others here don't want to have 100mb of Mono, 50mb of Python, 50mb of Ruby, 50mb of Java installed only to run the one or other application that depends on it.

Why not? In Windows most people are running applications written in at least C, C++, VB and Delphi. On OS X people are running applications written in C++, Obj-C, Obj-C++ and Java. And OS X includes Python and Perl out of the box so they're there whether or not you use them.

Of course you're just trolling (as usual) and don't care about what other people are doing.

I think the majority of us readers and users of GNOME want to have a consistent Desktop written throughly in one language.

I think you don't know what you're talking about. That's not something which is realistic to expect on any operating system.

The bindings or language stuff can be an addition ontop of it for those who want it. I think exactly this is one of the main concerns in the head of many people. The more they hear people like you talking about Python, Ruby, Mono, Java, <add whatever here> the more you do to get rid of people. Atm as it looks like GNOME is more of a construction lot for experiments than a serious Desktop Environment.

If only their choices would drive you away so we don't need to listen to your uninformed drivel. Please, go away and stop posting this nonsense.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Gnome bloat and is slow
by klynch on Fri 8th Jul 2005 08:14 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Gnome bloat and is slow"
klynch Member since:
2005-07-06

Why not? In Windows most people are running applications written in at least C, C++, VB and Delphi. On OS X people are running applications written in C++, Obj-C, Obj-C++ and Java. And OS X includes Python and Perl out of the box so they're there whether or not you use them.

I have to agree with you that the development language really doesn't matter. However, the previous poster would probably agree with me in saying that languages do play a part.
If I have 2 different apps that are relatively similar, one written in C/C++ and the other in, say, Ruby, then I would probably opt for the C/C++ app just so I won't have to install Ruby libs and have to maintain updates for yet another package.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Gnome bloat and is slow
by MORB on Fri 8th Jul 2005 09:06 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Gnome bloat and is slow"
MORB Member since:
2005-07-06

C++ is a programming language. GTK+ is a GUI API framework.
I agree. Since you pointed out that it's comparing aples to oranges, why did you bother to do the comparison anyway ?

C++ can't do anything remarkable that can't be done in any other language
And no programming language can do anything remarkable that can't be done in assembly.

C++ is also a horrible, complex and distasteful programming language to weild.
That's exactly what I thought, as long as I was fighting C++ instead of working with it, all while thinking I knew better than the people who designed the language.

The problem of C++ is that since it contains a large subset of C for interoperability purpose, an awful lot of people just keep programming it like it was C and just cherry pick a few C++ features.
C++ is not C. It's a totally different language, and coding in C++ by doing things the C way is dangerous and is why a lot of C++ code is messy and hard to maintain.
For instance, there is no problem using exceptions - as long as you don't keep writing C, which is mostly incompatible with exceptions.

So much for C++ evolution and maturity that in this day and age we still have to battle memory corruptions, leaks, overflows, underflows, and an assorted array of security vulnerabilities both known and unknown
That's exactly what happens when you insist on your code being some bizarre C/C++ chimera.
Take advantage of the RAII pattern, use STL containers instead of old-style strings and arrays, use smart-pointers, and these problems are no more.

There are also good programming practices, like writing your code in a way that avoid useless clutter and makes the purpose of the code more apparent, that just aren't possible in C.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Gnome bloat and is slow
by Anonymous on Fri 8th Jul 2005 10:44 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Gnome bloat and is slow"
Anonymous Member since:
---

C++ can't do anything remarkable that can't be done in any other language

And no programming language can do anything remarkable that can't be done in assembly.

That is just BS. There are lots of programming languages that can perform magic on schedules, budgets, quality, maitainability and a slew of other areas that ASM or even C++ can't dream of.

Reply Score: 0

RE[6]: Gnome bloat and is slow
by MORB on Fri 8th Jul 2005 11:13 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Gnome bloat and is slow"
MORB Member since:
2005-07-06

I was merely showing how his argument against c++ was absurd, because he was basically implying that what can be done in c++ can be done in c - which is true only to the extent that you ignore all these parameters you mentioned.
And comments like "there are lots of <things> that are better than <other thing>" without any form of substantation are pretty useless.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Gnome bloat and is slow
by Mystilleef on Fri 8th Jul 2005 14:55 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Gnome bloat and is slow"
Mystilleef Member since:
2005-06-29

That's another problem with the C++ community. Everytime you point out how totally wrecked the language is, they tell you you are not doing things the right way.

Use feature X, don't use feature Y. You are coding C not C++. Use this library, don't use that library. All the while, time is passing, resources are been expended and I'm way past my deadline.

This is the language Mr Anonymous thinks will automatically do wonders for GNOME. This is the language to bring stability, security and consistency to GNOME.

There is a reason I called C++ unwieldy, and MORB just proved my point. It's unwieldy because no bloody person ever does things the right way. The amount of gotchas inherent in the language will make stone-cold killer squeal like a lil' bitch.

I know...I know...I'm probably coding C++ the wrong way...

*sighs*

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Gnome bloat and is slow
by MORB on Fri 8th Jul 2005 16:02 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Gnome bloat and is slow"
MORB Member since:
2005-07-06

You sound more like you never really tried, actually.

And there are people doing good, working, proper, readable, enjoyable c++. KDE is an example.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Gnome bloat and is slow
by rhavyn on Fri 8th Jul 2005 18:09 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Gnome bloat and is slow"
rhavyn Member since:
2005-07-06

nd there are people doing good, working, proper, readable, enjoyable c++. KDE is an example.

That's kinda funny because KDE (because of Qt) is using non-standard extensions and preprosessors instead of using built in C++ constructs. So does that mean that "good, working, proper" C++ doesn't actually need to use C++ constructs?

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Gnome bloat and is slow
by Mystilleef on Fri 8th Jul 2005 18:48 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Gnome bloat and is slow"
Mystilleef Member since:
2005-06-29

As far as I know, the KDE/Qt folks shawned much of the C++ standards, and for good reasons might I add.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Gnome bloat and is slow
by rayiner on Thu 7th Jul 2005 21:16 UTC in reply to "Gnome bloat and is slow"
rayiner Member since:
2005-07-06

Gnome is bloat.The Fedora core4 when I entered the gnome default environment,it consumed memory more than the kde 3.4 in fc4.

Memory, relative to the other parts of a computer is cheap. The difference between GNOME and KDE is at most 50-100MB. At today's prices, that's less than $10 worth of RAM. There is no way that is expensive for anyone with a computer.

gnome's no future

I think GNOME and KDE both have very bright futures. I recently installed Fedora Core 4 on my new computer, and I have to say that GNOME 2.10 is a nice environment. I've only been using it a couple of days, but it is clean, uncluttered, and very stable (I haven't encountered a bug yet). It's also pretty fast, though anything less would be inexcusable on a dual-core athlon64. It's certainly one of the more enjoyable user experiences I've had with a computer in the last few years.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Gnome bloat and is slow
by Anonymous on Thu 7th Jul 2005 23:21 UTC in reply to "RE: Gnome bloat and is slow"
Anonymous Member since:
---

"Memory, relative to the other parts of a computer is cheap. The difference between GNOME and KDE is at most 50-100MB. At today's prices, that's less than $10 worth of RAM. There is no way that is expensive for anyone with a computer."

All the same, I'd prefer if it didn't use more RAM than is necessary (this measured by comparing to comparable alternatives). The less it uses, the more is left for other programs.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Gnome bloat and is slow
by rayiner on Fri 8th Jul 2005 01:11 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Gnome bloat and is slow"
rayiner Member since:
2005-07-06

Your preference is arbitrary and silly. No matter what your configuration, adding GNOME to it means $10 worth of extra RAM. That's all you pay for the large application based and polished UI.

Reply Score: 1

v I am disappointed with GNOME
by Anonymous on Thu 7th Jul 2005 20:25 UTC
Ali, stop
by Anonymous on Thu 7th Jul 2005 20:45 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

You're doing it again Ali. Only this time, you're lying about being a GNOME user. Stop.

Reply Score: 0

v RE: Ali, stop
by Anonymous on Thu 7th Jul 2005 22:23 UTC in reply to "Ali, stop"
...
by Anonymous on Thu 7th Jul 2005 21:05 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

GNOME ROCKS!!!

I can't waith for 2.12.

Reply Score: 0

It's really about bloat and languages?
by JrezIN on Thu 7th Jul 2005 21:47 UTC
JrezIN
Member since:
2005-06-29

I think this discussion, besides not really talking about the new GNOME's release, is going about opinions, and not facts...
why? because talking about "applications" doesn't really means anything. One application is created to do/solve some task, if it doesn't do it, or doesn't do it really well; the application is no good.
Then... if you need an application to do something, you should first consider what more important to this application. Should it be easily updated? should the code the re-used often? should it talk with other applications/environment really well? should it be fast with user interaction? or should it just be friendly t the user? or maybe it's more important the network transfer done faster?

THEN, after the design decisions you should choose what's best suited to build your application (sure, some 'try and error', sketches to some parts and other paths doesn't change your final design decisions... they may evolve with the experience gathered in the stage of the project). PyGTK for example provides a really easy way to create user interfaces, letting you programing less and focus more on the interface design. But maybe it's not suited for you if you need a really fast and responsible interface for, example, a drawing program that needs to run in 1GHz PCs.

You may find that writing apps from raw C and C++ a big and boring task... maybe it is... but writing C++ apps for BeOS could be a really pleasing task. Is C++ different there? Or it's the system's design the provides you this pleasure? Isn't Python's and PyGTK's (and Glade?) design decisions that make programming user interfaces with then? Their standard libraries and other tools?

There's no ultimate language/toolkit... it's always about what you need and what are your options to do that; it's about your decisions and your target. it's about doing a good design!

Reply Score: 1

I still confused...
by Saem on Thu 7th Jul 2005 22:58 UTC
Saem
Member since:
2005-07-06

Perhaps, this is just because I'm seeing things with a bias. But I'm not seeing any interesting and compelling frameworks, that makes things easy and elegant for the programmer. ie. supporting a lot of interesting desktop functionality doesn't seem straight forward or rather isn't all that easy to do, perhaps I'm mistaken.

What was interesting to know bonboui got an update, even though it's supposedly deprecated. What confuses me is what's the replacement for embedding apps such as KParts?

Reply Score: 1

v @MORB
by Anonymous on Fri 8th Jul 2005 11:43 UTC