Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #81967 > unrolled thread
| Started by | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-02-12 05:45 +0000 |
| Last post | 2026-02-12 17:34 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 85 — 16 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-02-12 05:45 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-02-12 02:05 -0500
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-02-12 09:08 -0800
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-02-12 19:05 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-02-12 21:09 -0500
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-02-13 06:08 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-02-13 02:19 -0500
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-02-13 18:30 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-02-14 23:01 -0500
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-02-15 06:18 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-02-15 08:01 -0500
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-02-15 17:27 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-02-15 19:40 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-02-15 20:43 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-02-15 23:12 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-02-15 21:30 -0500
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-02-16 07:39 -0500
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2026-02-17 10:14 +0100
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-02-17 10:22 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2026-02-17 14:16 +0100
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-02-26 09:25 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-02-15 21:09 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-02-16 10:28 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-02-16 19:21 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-02-16 12:14 +0100
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2026-02-16 08:51 -0800
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-02-17 10:15 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-02-17 11:45 +0100
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2026-02-17 14:17 +0100
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-02-17 15:00 +0100
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-02-18 00:28 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-02-18 02:32 +0100
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-02-18 03:14 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-02-19 19:27 +0100
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2026-02-17 11:38 -0800
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2026-02-17 14:17 +0100
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-02-17 15:03 +0100
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-02-17 14:10 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-02-18 00:33 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-02-28 20:48 +0100
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-01 02:25 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-03-01 07:50 -0500
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year rbowman <goawy@montana.com> - 2026-03-01 18:34 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-03-02 07:22 -0500
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-02 18:58 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-03-02 15:05 -0500
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-03 02:12 -0500
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-03 18:58 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-03-06 00:17 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-03-07 08:05 +1000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-03-08 02:05 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-02-24 07:22 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2026-02-24 10:38 +0100
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-02-24 12:12 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2026-02-24 13:51 +0100
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-02-24 13:28 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-02-24 18:23 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-02-24 22:25 -0500
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-02-25 08:49 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-02-25 11:19 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-02-25 16:43 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-02-25 17:40 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-02-25 20:00 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-02-25 23:54 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-02-26 07:36 +1000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-02-24 15:29 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-02-24 12:10 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-02-25 10:21 -0800
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-02-25 20:00 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-02-25 13:26 -0800
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-02-26 11:24 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-02-26 17:29 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-02-25 22:25 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2026-02-17 11:35 -0800
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-02-16 20:36 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-02-16 18:43 -0500
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-02-16 18:42 -0500
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-02-16 07:37 -0500
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-02-15 19:16 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2026-02-15 11:59 -0800
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-02-15 22:30 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2026-02-15 15:56 -0800
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-02-15 22:28 -0500
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-02-16 10:44 +0000
Re: Linux Mint may make fewer releases a year Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-02-12 17:34 +0000
Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next page →
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-02-25 16:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <cFFnR.147183$qcD6.44850@fx08.iad> |
| In reply to | #82245 |
On 2026-02-25, Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote: > Ground-up rewrites are usually a mistake. Either that or they're a sign that a bad mistake was made back in the beginning. "There's never time to do it right, but always time to do it over." -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | Growth for the sake of \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | growth is the ideology X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | of the cancer cell. / \ if you read it the right way. | -- Edward Abbey
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-02-25 17:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10nnc70$v5i0$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #82258 |
On 25/02/2026 16:43, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2026-02-25, Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote: > >> Ground-up rewrites are usually a mistake. > > Either that or they're a sign that a bad mistake was made > back in the beginning. > Digital Apocrypha has it that Gary Kildall had a summer job as a student to fix some assembler code. He rewrote it in FORTRAN and it ran several times faster.... Many many times code gets patched and patched and fixed until it really is a mess. > "There's never time to do it right, but always time to do it over." > -- I was brought up to believe that you should never give offence if you can avoid it; the new culture tells us you should always take offence if you can. There are now experts in the art of taking offence, indeed whole academic subjects, such as 'gender studies', devoted to it. Sir Roger Scruton
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-02-25 20:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <kxInR.584154$hp4e.123436@fx48.iad> |
| In reply to | #82259 |
On 2026-02-25, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > On 25/02/2026 16:43, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > >> On 2026-02-25, Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote: >> >>> Ground-up rewrites are usually a mistake. >> >> Either that or they're a sign that a bad mistake was made >> back in the beginning. > > Digital Apocrypha has it that Gary Kildall had a summer job as a student > to fix some assembler code. > > He rewrote it in FORTRAN and it ran several times faster.... On the other tentacle, Univac's 8080 cross-assembler was written in FORTRAN and it ran like molasses in January. A friend re-wrote it in COBOL and its execution time on the same machine was neglegible compared to the time either one spent in the job scheduler. > Many many times code gets patched and patched and fixed until it really > is a mess. > >> "There's never time to do it right, but always time to do it over." I ported a lot of programs that had gotten into that state, and enjoyed doing a lot of cleaning in the process, reducing line count by 30% or more and greatly improving readability. My favourite was when a feature the customer had tried to add never worked, but suddenly started working after my clean-up. (Yes, I know that some spoilsport is now going to give a lecture on bug-compatibility. Cut me some slack...) -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | Growth for the sake of \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | growth is the ideology X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | of the cancer cell. / \ if you read it the right way. | -- Edward Abbey
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-02-25 23:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10no247$178pi$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #82265 |
On 2026-02-25, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2026-02-25, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > >> On 25/02/2026 16:43, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >> >>> On 2026-02-25, Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote: >>> >>>> Ground-up rewrites are usually a mistake. [...] >>> "There's never time to do it right, but always time to do it over." > > I ported a lot of programs that had gotten into that state, > and enjoyed doing a lot of cleaning in the process, reducing > line count by 30% or more and greatly improving readability. > My favourite was when a feature the customer had tried to add > never worked, but suddenly started working after my clean-up. > > (Yes, I know that some spoilsport is now going to give > a lecture on bug-compatibility. Cut me some slack...) You mean https://xkcd.com/1172/ ? -- Nuno Silva
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-02-26 07:36 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <699f6b7a@news.ausics.net> |
| In reply to | #82225 |
Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> wrote: > The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >>Indeed. But I suspect a ground up rewrite of Firefox et al would vastly >>improve its performance. > > Maybe, but since noone is working on that, it's moot to think about > it. No, there is a team, now funded by the Linux Foundation, working on exactly that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Servo_browser_engine > The opposite is reality: We had more browser engines in the market > five years ago than we had today. Well my end of the "market" is dominated by Dillo, which I use for most of my web browsing. Though when I do have to use Firefox it's mostly on systems with 2GB RAM, so that's not impossible either. Blocking lots of the useless (except to people spying on you) Javascript junk with NoScript certainly helps. -- __ __ #_ < |\| |< _#
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-02-24 15:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10nkg53$3vhg9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #82219 |
On 2026-02-24, Marc Haber wrote: > Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote: [...] >>I remember the days when the desktop, which had >>just a bit more of that (384 MiB, perhaps?) could keep hundreds of tabs >>open (might have been in Firefox back then, > > I am not sure whether Firefox had tabs back in the times when we had > less than 1 Gig of RAM. AFAIK Firefox has always had tabs, at least I have never used a version without tabs. But it's possible I didn't see something, as I said I wasn't really a so early user IIRC. Although I remember experiencing issues already as of versions 3 and 4 (but to be fair, back then, major version numbers were a thing, so that may have been years after the first release). It'd have been a massive downgrade from Mozilla if it didn't have tabbed browsing. -- Nuno Silva
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-02-24 12:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10nk4fq$3qvpn$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #82214 |
On 24/02/2026 07:22, Nuno Silva wrote: >> In these days the memory footprint of the DE stops counting when the >> browser is started. > And that's another thing that needs to be improved - how did it become > so acceptable for some web pages to require so many resources, let alone > browsers themselves. I remember the days when the desktop, which had > just a bit more of that (384 MiB, perhaps?) could keep hundreds of tabs > open (might have been in Firefox back then, in the time shortly > afterwards Mozilla tried to give up on the suite (which is what I use > nowadays)). > Sadly the days of the thin client are gone: the current economics of hardware, and indeed the whole internet, heavily bias the world towards distributed processing power but centralised data. Ram is (or was) cheap as is internet bandwidth and CPU/GPU power - so let's build an general purpose GUI called a 'browser' > I know some examples of websites that become so unusable because of how > many content they load or because of CSS animations and effects, and > that's not to mention the ones which don't work because some underlying > framework requires a shiny new feature and is not backwards-compatible > when it's not present. Also, at least one site has required webgl in > order to work, which I find especially amusing... Indeed. And yet what is the alternative? javaShit™ may be utter bollocks, but it does what people like to use - in particular highly interactive web pages. -- “A leader is best When people barely know he exists. Of a good leader, who talks little,When his work is done, his aim fulfilled,They will say, “We did this ourselves.” ― Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-02-25 10:21 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <20260225102117.00003cc1@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #82065 |
On Tue, 17 Feb 2026 14:17:17 +0100 Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> wrote: > In these days the memory footprint of the DE stops counting when the > browser is started. Frankly *every* aspect of modern computing is in need of industrial liposuction - but the fact that one part of a user's ecosystem being even more of a hog than the DE doesn't make the DE being a hog not count; to the contrary, a bloated DE is going to make things even worse when combined with a bloated browser loading bloated websites than it would if the user wasn't relying on a browser at all, because there's even less slack to spare for glitzy DE features.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-02-25 20:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <lxInR.584155$hp4e.343640@fx48.iad> |
| In reply to | #82262 |
On 2026-02-25, John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Feb 2026 14:17:17 +0100
> Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> wrote:
>
>> In these days the memory footprint of the DE stops counting when the
>> browser is started.
>
> Frankly *every* aspect of modern computing is in need of industrial
> liposuction
Nice term.
"This town needs an enema!"
-- The Joker (as played by Jack Nicholson)
> - but the fact that one part of a user's ecosystem being
> even more of a hog than the DE doesn't make the DE being a hog not
> count; to the contrary, a bloated DE is going to make things even worse
> when combined with a bloated browser loading bloated websites than it
> would if the user wasn't relying on a browser at all, because there's
> even less slack to spare for glitzy DE features.
Abundance justifies waste. :-(
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Growth for the sake of
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | growth is the ideology
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | of the cancer cell.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Edward Abbey
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-02-25 13:26 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <20260225132621.00004ba0@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #82266 |
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 20:00:17 GMT Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote: > Abundance justifies waste. :-( Might be truer to say that abundance provides a *pretext* for waste. Seems like the bill always comes due, sooner or later...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-02-26 11:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10npahv$1j2bb$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #82268 |
On 25/02/2026 21:26, John Ames wrote: > On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 20:00:17 GMT > Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote: > >> Abundance justifies waste. :-( > > Might be truer to say that abundance provides a *pretext* for waste. > Seems like the bill always comes due, sooner or later... > I think from my analysis of the American Worldview, it is more a question of 'abundance makes waste irrelevant/unnoticeable' Many years ago I knew a girl who was, to put it bluntly, poor. She went out to dinner with a man who paid a large sum of money on a meal and wine. "I would rather he had bought me a new pair of jeans".... -- There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact. Mark Twain
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-02-26 17:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <6q%nR.464502$jUc3.80499@fx09.iad> |
| In reply to | #82268 |
On 2026-02-25, John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 20:00:17 GMT > Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote: > >> Abundance justifies waste. :-( > > Might be truer to say that abundance provides a *pretext* for waste. > Seems like the bill always comes due, sooner or later... True, but by then the execs responsible will have packed their golden parachutes and are long gone. The joys of a short attention span... -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | Growth for the sake of \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | growth is the ideology X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | of the cancer cell. / \ if you read it the right way. | -- Edward Abbey
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-02-25 22:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10nnst8$15imo$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #82262 |
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 10:21:17 -0800, John Ames wrote: > Frankly *every* aspect of modern computing is in need of industrial > liposuction ... At least in Open Source software, we know exactly where we need to cut -- if you really want to cut ... <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nbv9L-WIu0s>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-02-17 11:35 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <10n2fuu$21tpe$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #82059 |
On 2/17/26 02:15, Nuno Silva wrote: > On 2026-02-16, Bobbie Sellers wrote: > >> >> Actually Plasma 5 was very light but Plasma 6 added back a lot of volume >> in disk and memory space. Despite that it contains useful improvements >> especially to the clipboard. Sadly KDE has decided to beome dependent >> on systemd so that it will become much heavier and I will have to give it >> up as PCLinuxOS is specifically anti-systemd or Poettering's folly as we >> call it. I started using KDE about 20 years ago on version 3.57 for >> Mandriva because it gave me a Desktop Environment on which I could >> maintain the workflow I had become accustomed to on AmigaOS. > > Not that this says anything about whether it will depend more on systemd > or not, but some posts I saw on the fediverse suggest that currently > only their graphical login manager depends/will depend on systemd. > > If the KDE sources are not misleading and really mean it by saying it's > just the login manager, then the desktop itself ought to be still usable > without systemd. > >> I have run it on lots of laptops including a thrift shop Inspiron 4000 >> with a 700 MHz coppermine with <1 GB of memory. It came with >> Windows XP and KDE was as fast as XP once I cut back Virtual >> Desktops to only 1. >> >> KAOS is also trying to kick the Plasma habit as well because they >> are unhappy with the increased dependency on systemd. They have used >> systemd up to now and so must be waking up to the idea that it is a >> anti-GNU/Linux kludge. > > I haven't used desktop environments in a long time, I remember the days > KDE was heavy enough to be a problem with, what was it, 64 MiB RAM? :-) > > (The problem might have been not the DE itself, but that it didn't leave > much to run other not-so-light applications like OOo.) > Well I nerver had problems with Open Office or LibreOffice but think I will be using Only Office in the future. As soon as I locate my camera which is USB external I will be upgrading this machines memory and disk. ram from 16 to 32 GB and SSD from 512 to 1.5 TB. I promised my fellow users at the PCLinux Forum to provide pictures some time back. Then I broke my right ankle so that I have been not been myself for about 17 months. Camera will be run from my Dell 7450 when I find it. bliss- Dell Precision 7730- PCLOS 2026.01- Linux 6.12.71 pclos1- KDE Plasma 6.5.5
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-02-16 20:36 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10mvv42$16sdh$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #82044 |
On Mon, 16 Feb 2026 12:14:18 +0100, Carlos E. R. wrote: > On 2026-02-15 22:09, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > >> On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 17:27:46 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >> >>> KDE looked lovely, but was far too heavyweight ... >> >> It’s not, actually; remember, it’s built on top of the Qt >> framework, which is optimized to work efficiently on a wide range >> of hardware configurations, including embedded ones. >> >> When KDE 4 came out, I was able to run it with full 3D effects >> quite comfortably on a single-processor 900MHz Celeron machine -- >> my Asus Eee 701 netbook. > > That was relatively recent. 2008??
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-02-16 18:43 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ZGmdnSf5RaQ3Ng70nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #82049 |
On 2/16/26 15:36, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > On Mon, 16 Feb 2026 12:14:18 +0100, Carlos E. R. wrote: > >> On 2026-02-15 22:09, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: >> >>> On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 17:27:46 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >>> >>>> KDE looked lovely, but was far too heavyweight ... >>> >>> It’s not, actually; remember, it’s built on top of the Qt >>> framework, which is optimized to work efficiently on a wide range >>> of hardware configurations, including embedded ones. >>> >>> When KDE 4 came out, I was able to run it with full 3D effects >>> quite comfortably on a single-processor 900MHz Celeron machine -- >>> my Asus Eee 701 netbook. >> >> That was relatively recent. > > 2008?? Hey, if you're an old fart, 2008 *is* 'recent' :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-02-16 18:42 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ZGmdnST5RaTmNg70nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #82044 |
On 2/16/26 06:14, Carlos E. R. wrote: > On 2026-02-15 22:09, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: >> On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 17:27:46 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >> >>> KDE looked lovely, but was far too heavyweight ... >> >> It’s not, actually; remember, it’s built on top of the Qt framework, >> which is optimized to work efficiently on a wide range of hardware >> configurations, including embedded ones. >> >> When KDE 4 came out, I was able to run it with full 3D effects quite >> comfortably on a single-processor 900MHz Celeron machine -- my Asus >> Eee 701 netbook. > > That was relatively recent. Further past, KDE was heavy weight. At some > point they dedicated a collective effort to trim it, and suddenly it > became lean. > > ChatGPT says it happened with the transition from KDE 4.x to KDE Plasma > 5, starting in mid-2014. I got OpenSUSE, a fairly frugal install, with KDE Plasma to run on a Pi-4. It was NOT snappy. Expensive desk/lap-tops can disguise 'heaviness' issues. Run on a barely-adequate old box if you want a real-world comparison. The recent KDE *is* better ... but XFCE or LXDE will still be obviously snappier. And frankly I don't LIKE all the bells and whistles and eye-candy and 'integration' crap. I'll stick with the light GUIs.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-02-16 07:37 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <10mv330$r07d$7@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #82031 |
Charlie Gibbs wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS (fixed): > On 2026-02-15, Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote: > >> Anyway, my first distro was the old RedHat 6. Then I bought a >> no-name laptop with Windows NT on it, and used that for awhile. >> Then I tried to install RedHat. Partway through the screen would >> blank and a weird glow would appear. (I later learned it was some >> issue with the AMD K6 CPU.) >> >> So I download Debian and burned an install CD. We were on a road >> trip, so I spent a lot of time in the passenger seat getting it >> installed, getting familiar with dselect, and getting the GUI >> running. It was very absorbing. >> >> I didn't try any other distro until Gentoo years later. > > When I first decided to set up a Linux machine, I went to the > local bookstore and perused the various Linux books which had > an installation CD included. The book I liked best happened > to be by Patrick Volkerding, so my first distro was Slackware > 3.5, which ran happily on a laptop with 48MB of memory and a > 1.3G hard drive. > > I stayed with Slack for some time, but the lack of package > management tools finally got to be too much. Ubuntu 10 was > much easier to set up and maintain, but then they switched > to the Unity desktop so I bid it farewell. I tried a few > other distros (e.g. Mint, CrunchBang) and desktops. > > Blackbox was nicely lean and mean - perhaps a bit too much so. I used Blackbox for awhile. On a slow machine dragging the menu had a severe lag. Now I've been stuck on its C++ derivative, Fluxbox, for years. Sometimes I'll start with Xfce4. Currently I use it's power manager, and picom for the compositor. Anyway, I have 3 machines running: Debian Sid, Ubuntu Studio, and Arch. I left KDE alone on the Studio box, as I use it mostly via SSH to build code. > KDE > looked lovely, but was far too heavyweight; even worse, it > was constantly spitting messages out in a console window, > indicating it was doing too much behind my back for comfort. > Eventually I settled on Debian and Xfce. -- Little girls, like butterflies, need no excuse. -- Lazarus Long
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-02-15 19:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mvekc7F313qU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #82030 |
On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 08:01:28 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > Anyway, my first distro was the old RedHat 6. Then I bought a no-name > laptop with Windows NT on it, and used that for awhile. Then I tried to > install RedHat. Partway through the screen would blank and a weird glow > would appear. (I later learned it was some issue with the AMD K6 CPU.) My first was Slackware. First I downloaded a couple of boxes of floppies worth over dialup and then painfully assembled them. I forget what the donor box was. iirc the basic OS was under 20 floppies but if you wanted gcc, build_tools, and other pieces of a working system it was over 30. I think the second time around it was Mandrake from a shrink-wrapped box. Much more pleasant experience. Mandrake was sort of the Ubuntu of its day.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-02-15 11:59 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <10mt8im$a3tj$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #82032 |
On 2/15/26 11:16, rbowman wrote: > On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 08:01:28 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > >> Anyway, my first distro was the old RedHat 6. Then I bought a no-name >> laptop with Windows NT on it, and used that for awhile. Then I tried to >> install RedHat. Partway through the screen would blank and a weird glow >> would appear. (I later learned it was some issue with the AMD K6 CPU.) > > My first was Slackware. First I downloaded a couple of boxes of floppies > worth over dialup and then painfully assembled them. I forget what the > donor box was. > > iirc the basic OS was under 20 floppies but if you wanted gcc, > build_tools, and other pieces of a working system it was over 30. > > I think the second time around it was Mandrake from a shrink-wrapped box. > Much more pleasant experience. Mandrake was sort of the Ubuntu of its day. I started with Mandriva 2006. Shipped to me from Europe by a pal with 6 CD iso files on a DVD. I had a Good Quality(brand name, not really very good) with DVD R CD rw drive a 2.4 MHz Pentium running XP. I did very little on XP but then turned those 6 CD files into Iso files. Split the disk drive in half and put Mandriva on the space. I personally feel that Mandriva was way ahead of any Ubuntu I have seen. I only used Mandriva for a few years before the company went bankrupt. That was after I got several versions that I paid for with the extra codecs for video and audio. These were called Power-Packed but the fixed release model was difficult for me with limited space and in 2011 they produced a version that did not run on my Compaq. I could not get good advice online so I started looking for a replacement. Finally in 2014 ended up with the PCLinuxOS. bliss- Dell Precision 7730- PCLOS 2026.01- Linux 6.12.71 pclos1- KDE Plasma 6.5.5
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web