I finally took the plunge and installed Suse as the primary OS on my new laptop. My previous experience with Linux/Unix is via telnet from Windows so Linux GUI stuff is pretty new to me. I think I understand the difference between X and window managers like KDE/Gnome but it's rather confusing. I'll start simple - Suse apparently installs KDE by default. There are some apps I would like to run that are Gnome. Can KDE apps and Gnome apps run side-by-side or does KDE/Gnome "take over" the desktop in some way? I tried to just install a gnome app to see how it went but the resulting mass of missing dependencies that rpm spit out made me give it up. If they do run side by side do they interop at all? e.g. do they share the clipboard? Speaking of rpm... There has to be a better way. Every single thing I've installed had tons of dependencies. While it was nice of rpm to tell me what the missing dependencies were it then left it to me to find and download them. It doesn't help that some dependencies are not named the same as thier corresponding .rpm file or that some .rpm's can satisfy multiple dependencies. I think the shortest time it's taken for me to install a non-trivial app was a few hours of intensely manual babysitting, and the longest was 3 days, not counting the "I give up" kde/gnome debate above. And finally a simple question - what's the Linux equivalent to "cls". I know about "clear" but that only clears the current view into the console buffer - I want to wipe the whole thing and start over without actually closing the window and opening a new one.

Quote:Original post by technomancer

Quote:
If you want to avoid depedency hell install slackware

How does slackware acheive this marvalous feat!

I don't know much about other distros but Slack comes with lots of libraries, I really didn't need to install "many" additional libraries to install other software that doesn't already comes with the distro.

X

KDE and Gnome are not window managers: they are desktop environments.

They contain various components that make up a desktop environment. These include file managers, editors, control panels, media players. They also include window managers.

Generally, you don't have to use a component from an environment if you don't want to. You can use a window manager designed for Gnome, such as metacity, on a primarily KDE desktop.

Themselves, Gnome and KDE represent different design strategies for desktop environments. Gnome is a collection of independant components that are gathered together. KDE is a collection of components that are created for KDE.

For example, Gnome doesn't have a window manager, a file manager or a sound server. Instead there are window managers, file managers and sound servers that work with Gnome. Conversely, KDE has its own window manager, file manager and sound server. Although you can use non-KDE components in KDE, it isn't designed with that in mind.

Gnome and KDE use the same clipboard, because the clipboard lives in X. Beware, however, that some non-Gnome/KDE programs use their own clipboards. Moving data in and out of such programs can be difficult, but it is that program that is misbehaving, not everything else on your computer.

Slackware
Slackware doesn't solve the dependancy problem.

It lets you install packages without insisting that you check that dependencies are also installed. It does that because it doesn't even know what packages another package depends upon.

So Slackware users are still in dependancy hell. They just don't know it as soon as RPM users.

I use Gentoo and it installs everything you need automatically. I've never had a problem with package managment in Gentoo, except for the compile times for very large sets of packages (like KDE and Gnome).

Quote:Original post by Mayrel
X

KDE and Gnome are not window managers: they are desktop environments.

Slackware
Slackware doesn't solve the dependancy problem.

So Slackware users are still in dependancy hell. They just don't know it as soon as RPM users.

Acurate.

Anyway, I stand that I didn't pass trough hell to install many apps (and games) I use. I prefer to search for the dependencies myself, to visit the creator's site and read about them, what they do and what problems do they have, before I install them on my system. Based on that information I decide if the app is worth to be installed.

If I didn't care about that, I would use Ms. Windows instead of Linux.

I prefer to base my decision to install a package on the merits of the package itself, and not its dependencies.

In addition, I use Linux because it enables me to be productive without forking out huge wads of cash, not because I wish to 'stick it to the man'.

Finally, if I wanted to deal with the hassle of manually finding and installing the right versions of packages so that I can actually use my computer, I'd use Windows. Not quite sure what gave you the impression Windows wasn't more of a dependency hell than Linux.

Quote:Original post by Mayrel
I prefer to base my decision to install a package on the merits of the package itself, and not its dependencies.

In addition, I use Linux because it enables me to be productive without forking out huge wads of cash, not because I wish to 'stick it to the man'.

Finally, if I wanted to deal with the hassle of manually finding and installing the right versions of packages so that I can actually use my computer, I'd use Windows. Not quite sure what gave you the impression Windows wasn't more of a dependency hell than Linux.

I do not install/keep applications that use buggy/unsecure libraries, no matter the merits of the app.

I certainly never had dependency problems on Windows beyond DirectX, DivX, MDAC, DCOM and maybe once MFC/VB runtime libs.

Even if I don't share them, I do not question your reasons for using linux at all.