[plug] Gnome's annoying Windoze-isms
ishwor at posix.algorithmfreaks.com
Mon Apr 13 16:46:36 WST 2009
Daniel Pittman wrote:
> Ishwor <ishwor at posix.algorithmfreaks.com> writes:
>> Daniel Pittman wrote:
>>> Jason Posavec <jasonposavec at iinet.net.au> writes:
>>>> I run gnome primarily because it is meant to be faster and lighter
>>>> than the KDE alternative,
>>> This has never been true to any measure I have found, with the one
>>> exception that without prelinking the C++ code used to cost more in
>>> startup dynamic linking overhead.
>> I agree to Daniel in that Gnome has larger binary inter-dependencies
>> than KDE.
> Um. I didn't say that, and I don't think it is (strictly speaking)
> true, although the list of dependencies does support a view that the
> FreeBSD packaging of it has more independent packages.
The package names are pretty similar in ports VS. linuxs' package
magagement right even though I could totally out of whack here. If the
first statement holds though, wouldn't it imply that the binary
dependencies among Gnome/Gtk libs are more tightly coupled than KDE/Qt
libs (i.e, the KDE vs. Gnome) and that?
> The KDE dependency tree, often, a smaller number of large packages,
> while GNOME is a larger number of small packages.
> Regardless, they are both approximately the same size, complexity and
> difficulty to install in production.
More information about the plug