--=-5WdX3jZ3BDM9xb7edj6e Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Actually I use Midnight Commander all the time. That is my 'gui' file manager. Otherwise it's all cli. I know I can view all the rpms in it. I know I can get the source from 'most' ftps andd other places.. I'm just saying it's something I don't want to have to do. It would be nice to just find a simple tarball instead of the srpm. I know how to get around it... It's just a pain in the ass. nathan On Tue, 2001-10-09 at 08:49, George Toft wrote: > I guess I really am missing the point. If you want the source code, > I suggest the following: > 1. Use mc to browse the srpm, and copy the source tree to the=20 > directory of your choice; > 2. Go to the author's web site / ftp site and download it from=20 > there. If all he/she provides is RPM format, refer to #1 above. >=20 > mc is really easy to use, and it allows you to browse ftp sites > like they were a part of your local file system. It allows you > to browse tar balls and rpms. Check it out. You can do almost > everything you need with the arrow keys and the function keys. > No weird Unix commands to learn. If you have gpm installed,=20 > it is even point and click - almost like Windows! >=20 > George >=20 >=20 > Nathan England wrote: > >=20 > > I understand the marketing perspective, but you missed my point. > > I could care less if they only want to put out the rpm binaries, it's > > the source I am after anyway. But the source is getting harder and > > harder to find. Unless it's in a srpm format. > >=20 > > Thomas, if you write something to break up rpms into the tar.gz file, I > > would be very interested in that. Also, I'm going to look into alien. > > I've never heard of that. > >=20 > > I myself would more than likely only put out an rpm if I was a large > > company writing software, but I'd like to think that I would only > > release tar.gz files instead. Maybe build a generic installer, or use > > loki's installer. I appreciate all that Red Hat does for the open > > source community, but the Microsoft of the linux world is beginning to > > bother me. > >=20 > > As long as they continue to put out tar.gz files of the source, > > everything is peachy, but when it only comes in srpms linux will begin > > to fall apart. That's just my opinion. Unless there is an easy option > > for getting the source out of the srpm. > >=20 > > Kurt comes to mind on this one. Kde of course wants the largest market > > share of the desktop for it's Gnu/Linux users. The developers for kde > > work their asses off (without funding like the ximian group > know of, but I don't use kde, so I don't pay attention, honestly>) to > > put out some very impressive software. I built all the kde 2.2.1 > > packages from source and have it running on my slack system so I could > > see it, and though I've never much liked Kde, I must say, it's awesome. > > Back to my point, I can go to any kde mirror and find the tar.gz files, > > some in binary, others in source. And also the rpm's. But always I can > > find the tar.gz > > On the other hand, I remember a few months ago I went to the ximian sit= e > > to get the source for something and after jumping through an hours wort= h > > of hoops and not finding any source outside of srpms, I gave up... Late= r > > I found that any source I want I have to get from the Debian > > directories, and it's usually a development cycle behind. > >=20 > > Or maybe I'm just continually looking in the wrong spots. Though ximian > > has straightened out a little bit. It's still a pain in the ass to get > > the source for all the ximian stuff if I wanted to build ximian gnome > > from source... > > Not that I'd want to anyway. Gnome bothers me quite a bit as well! > > Can't wait for E 17. But I'm addicted to Evolution. And now with well > > over 4k messages in different folders spread through many directories > > and vfolders, I'm too hooked to switch to kmail. So I still use gnome, > > or the libraries anyway. > >=20 > > Enough ranting... who's next.? > >=20 > > nathan > >=20 > > On Sun, 2001-10-07 at 16:09, George Toft wrote: > > > I would look at it from a marketing perspective. Each of the > > > distros you cited are backed by a company. I believe Slack is > > > supported only by Patrick V. Also, look at the market share. > > > Red Hat has 55-60% market share, Caldera 10%, and all others > > > are less that that. Caldera and Mandrake are Red Hat spin-offs. > > > So what it comes down to is how much effort is a company willing > > > to spend on a distro (Slack) that has under 5% market share? > > > Anyone willing to use Slack or Debian presumable knows enough > > > to get it to work anyway, so they really don't need to support > > > it. > > > > > > Looking at it another way, knowing that Netscape has under 20% > > > market share, more and more web sites are being designed to work > > > only with I.E. Why? The effort to appease the 15-20% is not > > > worth the effort. That thought is more valid with only 5% > > > market share. > > > > > > Of course, some will say that 5% is worth going after. Loki > > > thought so, that's why we have some games. Linux on the > > > desktop is about 5% market share - Windows taking up the > > > other 95%. > > > > > > George > > > > > > > > > Rick Rosinski wrote: > > > > > > > > Over time, I have noticed (as did everybody else, no doubt) that wh= en > > > > checking for compatibility / requirements for most of the software = out there > > > > (Notably, StarOffice), they support RedHat, SuSE, Debian, Mandrake,= and even > > > > YellowDog, and of course, Solaris. But they do not support Slackwa= re, even > > > > though they provide a tarball binary (so it isn't because of any pa= ckage > > > > management). This really irritates me, and I worry about future re= leases of > > > > my programs will no longer work on a Slackware system. I don't wan= t to have > > > > to change to one of the above distributions just because of some ma= jor > > > > oversight of one of the first - and ongoing - distributions of Linu= x. > > > > > > > > Any comments, rants, verifications, discredits, etc.? > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Rick Rosinski > > > > http://rickrosinski.com > > > > rick@rickrosinski.com > > > > ________________________________________________ > > > > See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doe= sn't post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail. > > > > > > > > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us > > > > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss > > > ________________________________________________ > > > See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn= 't post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail. > > > > > > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us > > > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss > > -- > >=20 > > "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, > > but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." > > -- Albert Einstein > >=20 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------= --- > > Part 1.2Type: application/pgp-signature > ________________________________________________ > See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't p= ost to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail. >=20 > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss --=-5WdX3jZ3BDM9xb7edj6e Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQA7wz/GjpHZ/aPnU7cRAljuAJ9aAgRunAmxEv6Q32bdsPPMXEE0mgCg2P3t r3IM+m+eDkCTVFzXi20lwnY= =iXE4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-5WdX3jZ3BDM9xb7edj6e--