Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 14th Oct 2005 10:14 UTC, submitted by ajam
OpenStep, GNUstep New releases from the GNUstep project include an update to the GNUstep Startup package, which includes all four core GNUstep packages: make, base, gui and back. Updated Windows binaries for the base and gui packages just came out today. Also, recently the latest version of their workspace manager, GWorkspace, was released.
Order by: Score:
installing it?
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 11:54 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I'd love to try thisout. In fact, I've tried many times, but WindowMaker and GNUStep are so modular I never knew what to install just to get a clean, Window Maker Desktop with GNUStep for programming and stuff. I think maybe I'll try installing the source for GNUStep this time instead of the Ubuntu Packages.

Reply Score: 0

RE: installing it?
by ma_d on Fri 14th Oct 2005 16:31 UTC in reply to "installing it?"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

Windowmaker is easy, almost every distribution ships it... Debian, RedHat, I think even Mandriva has it as an extra....
But this doesn't look like WindowMaker, there seems to be some small modifications to what WindowMaker can traditionally do (like the app icons that aren't attached to a clip or dock).

I'd like it a lot more if it allowed me to get rid of the stupid double clicking...

Reply Score: 1

gui
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 11:55 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

why don't they develop the GUI? It's the same old nextstep GUI...

Reply Score: 0

RE: gui
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 11:59 UTC in reply to "gui"
Anonymous Member since:
---

...thats the point.

Some people regard the NEXTSTEP gui as one of the elegant interfaces around. It is supposed to embody minimalism, functionality and integration, unlike newer gui's such as kde.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: gui
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 22:48 UTC in reply to "RE: gui"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Some people regard the NEXTSTEP gui as one of the elegant interfaces around. It is supposed to embody minimalism, functionality and integration, unlike newer gui's such as kde.

Yeah, 15 years ago. Maybe it can be themed, but its not elegant or beautiful. For christs sake, can they xft their fonts at least.

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: gui
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 23:49 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: gui"
Anonymous Member since:
---

"Yeah, 15 years ago. Maybe it can be themed, but its not elegant or beautiful. For christs sake, can they xft their fonts at least."

Personally I prefer function to form. NeXTSTEP may not be as flashy as "modern" GUIs but it's still far more elegantly designed in a lot of ways.

It's not like GUIs in general have really changed much in the last 15 years, apart from the addition of system resource draining eye candy. When it comes to usability I think that the NeXTSTEP UI still had a big advantage over KDE/GNOME or Windows.

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: gui
by Anonymous on Sat 15th Oct 2005 15:50 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: gui"
Anonymous Member since:
---

GNUstep's most preferable backend is art which uses libart and freetype directly. The OpenStep's text system supports PostScript font system well. The text system is very elegant, there are even APIs to lay glyphs along any shape (eg. a star, a circle). You can also customize your text layout task by sorting out a few classes, extremely flexible.

Reply Score: 0

v RE: gui
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 12:03 UTC in reply to "gui"
RE: gui
by NicolasRoard on Fri 14th Oct 2005 13:19 UTC in reply to "gui"
NicolasRoard Member since:
2005-07-16

Well, you can use Camaelon + Nesedah, here is a screenshot: http://www.roard.com/screenshots/screenshot_ukuug2005.png

You can grab Camaelon from Etoile's cvs: http://etoile-project.org/ (an Etoile release is planned soon anyway)

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: gui
by Megatux on Sat 15th Oct 2005 03:19 UTC in reply to "RE: gui"
Megatux Member since:
2005-07-12

Beautiful!!!
Does anyone know the status of the other languages bindings like RIGS?

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: gui
by Anonymous on Sat 15th Oct 2005 08:46 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: gui"
Anonymous Member since:
---

RIGS is alive and well, JIGS is dead, StepTalk is alive but is more of a Scheme binding now then a Smalltalk binding. Objective C++ looks like it will be included in 4.2 so you can use Ruby, Scheme, Objective C, C++ and if somebody starts working on it again Java.

Steptalk is also supposed to provide a type of language pack for other languages but I don’t know how well that works or if somebody is working on it. The PyObj people want to make their stuff work with GNUStep too but that will take lots more time. Other FOSS MacOSX languages might work on GNUStep if they use Cocoa or might work on becoming usable on GNUStep.

Reply Score: 0

RE[4]: gui
by NicolasRoard on Sat 15th Oct 2005 13:09 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: gui"
NicolasRoard Member since:
2005-07-16

StepTalk is alive but is more of a Scheme binding now then a Smalltalk binding

? er... what ?!

No, StepTalk is a scripting framework to easily add scripting to your application. It works with language bundles (== plugins), so, as long as you have a language bundle, you can use the language -- the scripting support is thus independant from a particular language. Creating a new language bundle is quite simple.

For the moment there is a Smalltalk and a Scheme bundle, so you can uses Smalltalk and Schemes scripts in your applications.

While StepTalk is not meant in theory to write full applications with it, you can use it that way, and with the StepTalk palette in Gorm you can in effect program a complete application entirely in Gorm.

I can be wrong for JIGS, but I was under the impression that it was still working (albeit only for non-graphical stuff, but that's already quite useful if you want to reuse java libraries in your app..) -- because afaik Brainstorm still uses JIGS for their software..

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: gui
by Anonymous on Sat 15th Oct 2005 17:43 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: gui"
Anonymous Member since:
---

I think I mentioned the language bundle thing, and I do know that there are Smalltalk and Scheme bundles, but I'm not to happy that the guy that works on StepTalk appears to be mostly interested in Scheme, I haven't heard anything about Smalltalk in combination with StepTalk for a while now. Same goes for JIGS, maybe it still works for non gui stuff but by language binding I understand works fully (base and gui) and is maintained. Either way, if somebody wants a Smalltalk like language for GNUStep I think that F-Script should work. I've read somewhere that it dose, but since I can't dig that information out I wouldn't trust it myself.

Reply Score: 0

RE: gui
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 14:57 UTC in reply to "gui"
Anonymous Member since:
---

A good idea would be to integrate Xvie (openLook) with (OpenStep). I play with this idea and learn about Xview
hopefully it is not that much effort

Reply Score: 0

what I more want is...
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 11:58 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

What I more want like GNUStep is somethink like Wine. But running Mac-Programs on Linux instead of Windows-programs.

I think GNUStap can be seen as an equivalent to WineLib.
With WineLib you can compile Windows-Sourcefiles on Linux and with GNUStep you can compikle NextStep/MacOSX programs on Linux.

But since MacOSX moves over from PowerPC to Intel, it would be nice if the equivalent of Wine exists also.
So that it would be possible to run MacOSX-x86 binaries on Linux.
And I think somethink like this could be helpful for GNUStep.

With Wine it is the same. There existing more programs which runs in compiled Windows-binary form with Wine on Linux, then programs which can be compiled with WineLib on Linux.
Mostly it can not compiled on Linux because the use of MFC.

Reply Score: 0

RE: what I more want is...
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 12:08 UTC in reply to "what I more want is..."
Anonymous Member since:
---

no, mfc relys on winapi. winelib is recreating winapi. if winelib should ever become complete (i doubt that), mfc will not be a problem (is it now, anyway?).

Reply Score: 0

GWorkspace
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 12:12 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Is it possible to use GWorkspace on it's own without installing and using the rest of GNUstep?

As good as it looks there are hardly any apps available for GNUstep so it can't provide a usable and consistent desktop OS like NeXTSTEP. OTOH NeXTSTEP's file manager is one of the best ever created, much better than the Mac/Windows copies in KDE/GNOME. I might give Linux another try one of these days and it would be nice to have an excellent file manager on whatever DE I choose.

Reply Score: 0

RE: GWorkspace
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 12:22 UTC in reply to "GWorkspace"
Anonymous Member since:
---

"OTOH NeXTSTEP's file manager is one of the best ever created"

How about windowmaker with xfe?

Reply Score: 0

v RE[2]: GWorkspace
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 13:19 UTC in reply to "RE: GWorkspace"
RE[3]: GWorkspace
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 13:38 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: GWorkspace"
Anonymous Member since:
---

"Using xfe would be like a putting a turd on a van-gogh..."

Oh dear, I rather like it, so I'm sorry others feel that way, but in that case what about fsviewer?

Reply Score: 0

RE[4]: GWorkspace
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 13:47 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: GWorkspace"
Anonymous Member since:
---

sorry, wasn't meaning to put xfe down in anyway, was just meaning to highlight the fact that they are two completely different UI's.
I dont use xfe myself but I'm sure its a decent implementation of the windows explorer.

Personally I like properly integrated environments, hence I dont like running gnome apps in kde and vice versa.
The minimalist aesthetic of *step environments also appeals to me so using a relatively cluttered xfe would jar slightly.

Reply Score: 0

RE[5]: GWorkspace
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 13:59 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: GWorkspace"
Anonymous Member since:
---

No offence taken. Have you looked at fsviewer though? I haven't installed it, but from the screenshots, it seems to keep the look and feel. Don't know if it has all the features.

Reply Score: 0

RE[6]: GWorkspace
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 14:12 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: GWorkspace"
Anonymous Member since:
---

fsviewer is certainly a better fit, being pretty much a clone of the NEXTSTEP workspace manager. Neither were particularly feature-rich since the design was originally done in the late 80's/early 90's.
Some people would point to the lack of features as a downside but just think about the lack-of-bloat (bloatlessness??) that is another upside to them.

its horses-for-courses really, people are used to the windows way of doing things so tend to view everything else through windows coloured glasses.

Try it... you might like it...

Reply Score: 0

RE: GWorkspace
by NicolasRoard on Fri 14th Oct 2005 13:24 UTC in reply to "GWorkspace"
NicolasRoard Member since:
2005-07-16

Is it possible to use GWorkspace on it's own without installing and using the rest of GNUstep?

What do you mean, the rest of GNUstep ??? -- if you want to use a GNUstep app like GWorkspace, well, you need to install GNUstep -- base and gui !
GNUstep is an implementation of the OpenStep framework -- it's a library. The GNUstep project also provide incredible development tools (check http://xdev.org/gnustep/demo.html) like GORM, but you don't need to install them, obviously.

As good as it looks there are hardly any apps available for GNUstep so it can't provide a usable and consistent desktop OS like NeXTSTEP. OTOH NeXTSTEP's file manager is one of the best ever created, much better than the Mac/Windows copies in KDE/GNOME. I might give Linux another try one of these days and it would be nice to have an excellent file manager on whatever DE I choose.

Well, check the GNUstep liveCD, there's not as many GNUstep apps than KDE/GNOME apps, but the situation is a bit better than "hardly any apps available".

And of course, nothing prevent you from launching other linux apps from GNUstep.

Reply Score: 1

GNUstep live CD
by Lazarus on Fri 14th Oct 2005 12:14 UTC
Lazarus
Member since:
2005-08-10

There is also a GNUstep live CD that is nice for checking things out without installing it on your system:

http://www.linuks.mine.nu/gnustep/

Reply Score: 1

RE: GWorkspace
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 13:03 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

"How about windowmaker with xfe?"

Isn't xfe just another copy of Windows Explorer file management? I'd like something that mimics much the more elegant NeXTSTEP/Mac OS X file management.

Reply Score: 0

@Nicholas
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 13:33 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Hi, do you know the status on Backbone and what its role will be in contrast to WindowMaker in the future (supplement or replacement or something else)?

I'm asking, because I've used GNUstep under Ubuntu for a while and the integration with WindowMaker doesn't feel right, especially with GWorkspace colliding with WindowMaker's menus and icon bars, and was wondering what kind of work is being done in this area.

Reply Score: 0

RE: @Nicholas
by NicolasRoard on Fri 14th Oct 2005 16:18 UTC in reply to "@Nicholas"
NicolasRoard Member since:
2005-07-16

Hi, do you know the status on Backbone and what its role will be in contrast to WindowMaker in the future (supplement or replacement or something else)?

Sadly Backbone didn't really catch and development on it is more or less stopped. Personally, I am now working on Étoilé.

In theory both Backbone and Étoilé had their place, with Étoilé wanting to be more "innovative" in some ways, while Backbone was more about implementing a better nextstep-like desktop (which I'd like !!). But as Backbone didn't really progressed, and on the other hand as Étoilé started to catch attention among developers, and actual code beeing commited on the cvs, well...

About WindowMaker/GNUstep integration, well, it works quite well in general. Your problem is more between GWorkspace and WindowMaker, which is quite normal as GW implements some stuff that WM also provides (the dock..). One solution if you want to use GW is to start WM without a dock for example -- it's not a perfect solution, but hey...

Personally I do the reverse -- GW's dock is disabled and I use WM.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: @Nicholas
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 17:19 UTC in reply to "RE: @Nicholas"
Anonymous Member since:
---

I have a small question. Is it possible to add ObjC wrappers for Xview (OpenLook). How well do you estimate it will work? As far as I remember Xview worked like Gnustep, it was divided on a rendering infrastructure (postscript or x) and a front end. Is it possible to use this one for a GUI also (in order to revive the old spirit) because it seems compatible? Is it a lot of work for someone to undertake ( possibly yes) , does it have any practical implications? I mean actually something like the Xarm library. I need your comments.

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: @Nicholas
by NicolasRoard on Fri 14th Oct 2005 17:48 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: @Nicholas"
NicolasRoard Member since:
2005-07-16

Er, it's probably possible to create ObjC wrappers for OpenLook, but 1) it will probably be quite some work 2) what's the point ?

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: @Nicholas
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 18:12 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: @Nicholas"
Anonymous Member since:
---

For what purpose would you want to wrap Xview with Objective-C? If you hope that that would somehow make the look of GnuSTEP and Xview similar or the same, you are mistaken. Otherwise why waste your time on wrapping Xview with Objective-C?

Reply Score: 0

Cloning OSX
by rx182 on Fri 14th Oct 2005 13:36 UTC
rx182
Member since:
2005-07-08

I checked GNUstep several times already and I think it's one good framework (better than gtk and qt) to make something decent and solid.

But I never understood why there's almost no interest in GNUstep. With all the OSX lovers out there, I expected some kind of OSX clone for Linux built off GNUstep. But guess what: I've never seen a single attempt! Strange...

Maybe people are not informed at all about GNUstep?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Cloning OSX
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 15:33 UTC in reply to "Cloning OSX"
Anonymous Member since:
---

there are two school of thoughts here. I actually though of poorting OSX apps i wrote to Gnustep, but OSX is not nextstep or openstep it is Cocoa which is based on Nextstep but extended a lot. Gnustep is supposed to be nextstep. If people tried to port Cocoa using gnustep as a base there would probably be some sort of source compatibility between OSX and Linux.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Cloning OSX
by fafhrd on Fri 14th Oct 2005 15:43 UTC in reply to "RE: Cloning OSX"
fafhrd Member since:
2005-07-11

To clarify a little bit ...

- Both Cocoa and GNUstep inherit from OpenSTEP.
- Cocoa has evolved a bit
- GNUstep has evolved a bit
- Cocoa has extensions
- GNUstep has extensions
- GNUstep generally tracks Cocoa extensions where it makes sense.

Both Cenon http://www.cenon.info
and OOLite http://oolite-linux.berlios.de
are good examples of programs that were "ported to Linux" (so to speak) using the GNUstep libraries.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Cloning OSX
by NicolasRoard on Fri 14th Oct 2005 16:11 UTC in reply to "RE: Cloning OSX"
NicolasRoard Member since:
2005-07-16

OSX is not nextstep or openstep it is Cocoa which is based on Nextstep but extended a lot. Gnustep is supposed to be nextstep

No. Both Cocoa and GNUstep implements the OpenStep API. GNUstep doesn't implement at all the NEXTSTEP API, and is not supposed to be NEXTSTEP. The OpenStep API is inspired by the NEXTSTEP API, but is not the same.

In effect, a Cocoa program is portable on GNUstep quite easily.. providing that it doesn't use some OSX-specific libraries (like Quicktime).

Both Cocoa and GNUstep adds things to the OpenStep API, and GNUstep implements the Cocoa additions most of the time and even other Cocoa libraries (there's an effort right now to port CoreData for instance: http://gscoredata.nongnu.org/

Reply Score: 2

still actively developed?
by CaptainPinko on Fri 14th Oct 2005 14:30 UTC
CaptainPinko
Member since:
2005-07-21

I haven't heard of a new release from these guys in ages... is it developing at a snail's pace or is it all just under-the-radar?

Reply Score: 1

RE: still actively developed?
by fafhrd on Fri 14th Oct 2005 15:39 UTC in reply to "still actively developed?"
fafhrd Member since:
2005-07-11

Some would say the development pace isn't fast, true, but I feel that GNUstep is just mostly under the radar. I don't feel it's had that one killer app yet that would push it into people's fore-thought.

I use GNUstep based programs everyday, and I know many out there rely on them as well.

Reply Score: 1

fsviewer
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 15:19 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I'm definitely going to give fsviewer a try, it looks like a very close copy of the NeXTSTEP file manager.

As for it's "lack of features", I don't really see that, especially when compared with Explorer in Windows. For example, Windows Explorer can only provide a preview of a small number of file formats, NeXTSTEP's preview panel was a lot more versatile. It was extensible and a lot of apps added support for their file formats when they were installed. There's also the very useful shelf, a feature that doesn't exist in many other file managers. Then there are all the file management features that could be added with services, especially support for file conversion & compression.

Reply Score: 0

RE: fsviewer
by bogomipz on Mon 17th Oct 2005 08:35 UTC in reply to "fsviewer"
bogomipz Member since:
2005-07-11

Just so you know; fsviewer does not use GNUstep and therefore doesn't have services and so on. If you just want a simple file manager with a NeXT look to go with wmaker, it might be what you want, but be aware that it is based on WINGs (Wings Is Not Gnustep).

Reply Score: 1

Cloning
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 16:08 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I dont think he was talking about cloning at compile level - by tracking libraries etc.

I think he is talking about running actual Apple software (using PPC emulation/translation or whatever) and then doing something similar to WINE to make the unmodified Apple software to use GNUSTEP for display.

Reply Score: 0

Dreaming
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 16:58 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Darwin + Some kind of Quartz clone + GNUStep = my dream open source OS ;)

Reply Score: 0

RE: Dreaming
by djame on Fri 14th Oct 2005 20:20 UTC in reply to "Dreaming"
djame Member since:
2005-07-08

yes, bying a cheap mac os X machine
or buying what you need to run os X x86 (it's really easy) is too easy for you....

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Dreaming
by bogomipz on Mon 17th Oct 2005 08:26 UTC in reply to "RE: Dreaming"
bogomipz Member since:
2005-07-11

He was talking about his dream open source OS. Last time I checked, OS X was not open sourced. Besides, he probably sees the OS X x86 option as too illegal.

Reply Score: 1

GNUStep OS
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 21:56 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I think GNUStep would really take off if they created their own OS based on a linux distro, or maybe something more well integrated like FreeBSD. The live CD is nice, but it isn't very usefull even if you do install it to harddisk because the linux parts are so separate from the GNUStep parts. If they made their own OS, all nicely integrated and configurable from the GUI, it might draw more developer attention.

Reply Score: 0

RE: GNUStep OS
by Anonymous on Fri 14th Oct 2005 22:36 UTC in reply to "GNUStep OS"
Anonymous Member since:
---

There are lots of points as to why GNUStep has not yet taken off. The theme engine was not done, Objective C++ was not in GCC, there was no DE based on GNUStep, the Windows port sucked. All of these points are being addressed. Sometimes you just have to wait for everything to come together and GNUStep is damn close now, but the result won’t be what you expect. The GNUStepers aren’t the bunch of MacOSX fans that some people here might imagine them to be, half is nostalgically attached to NEXT and doesn’t want to stray to far from, the other half want something modern. You will get a nice and unique DE out of them; you will get it sooner now that most of the infrastructure is in place. But please don’t say something as dumb as GNUStep should be an OS. What can be gained by forcing the few programmers that GNUStep has to maintain a distro in addition to their already extensive work?

Reply Score: 0

Theme!!
by aquila_deus on Sat 15th Oct 2005 11:23 UTC
aquila_deus
Member since:
2005-10-02

still no ;) (

Reply Score: 1

RE: Theme!!
by NicolasRoard on Sat 15th Oct 2005 13:10 UTC in reply to "Theme!!"
NicolasRoard Member since:
2005-07-16

Read the comment above talking about Camaelon..

Reply Score: 1

awesome..
by Anonymous on Sat 15th Oct 2005 20:14 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I need to install the latest gnustep.. havent messed with it in a while. I LOVE the NEXTSTEP gui. I own a NeXT and use it quite often... The gui is one of the best around ;) Even if it is 17 years old.

Reply Score: 0