GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

Dusty · 2004-06-28 15:27:44

ROFL!

i3839 · 2004-06-28 15:28:48

dpb wrote:

No. Not because it's sponsored by Oracle. SourceForge itself is closed source.
You can find a good article about sourceforge here. It's a bit old, but still valid.

Can someone learn Dusty to back up his statements? A link as the one above is the minimum.

Only evil thing that VA Linux did was asking for all rights to sources from some people without telling them that they will switch to closed source. Perhaps they used those code in their current implementation, and wanted to avoid copyright problems. On the other hand they wouldn't need the rights if they wanted to use it for free software...

"Gpacman" would be very confusing, people would expect a GTK program instead of a KDE one.

Dusty · 2004-06-28 17:39:10

i3839 wrote:

Can someone learn Dusty to back up his statements? A link as the one above is the minimum.

Do you mean "teach"?

I don't have time right now to search for links to inform the uninitiated. My statement was, "ROFL", which is a difficult one to back up...

I do not post an opinion as fact unless I believe it to be true. It's not my job to tell people what to think, only what I think. If I say something that I believe is debateable, I use "IMO", or "IMHO" if I think I may be wrong. If I say something as a fact and you disagree, you can either search to find the truth, or ignore the statement. If you feel that it is an issue I would care to change my opinion on, then I would be happy to have "proof" that my opinion is incorrect. If it is an emotional debate, then forget about trying to change my opinion.

Further, providing a link is often a waste of time, because I would estimate at least 60% of the pages out there are just people posting their opinions. Do you want to back up your opinion with somebody else opinion? You could, of course, find links to pages that are posted as facts, but I would estimate that a fair number of "factual" pages are actually just propaganda. I cite cnn.com, cbc.ca, and slashdot.org as examples.

Dusty

i3839 · 2004-06-28 21:37:50

Oops, sorry Dusty, I confused you with dpb while forgetting some stuff in the meantime. I thought that you were the one who said that sourceforge is evil, but that was dpb, so what I said is totally irrelevant and should be ignored. I was writing my post while you posted yours (see the one minute post time difference), so that only made the confusion bigger...

To not make your post totally useless:

Agreed with your propaganda statement. You can probably find two sites which say that any fact is both true and false. The same is true for newspapers, so don't trust anything people! (And don't forget to look behind you all the time either)

I do think that your long posts makes your "no time" argument somewhat void though. ;-) Not that it matters anyway.

Again sorry for the confusion.

Dusty · 2004-06-28 23:22:03

i3839 wrote:

You can probably find two sites which say that any fact is both true and false.

Xerces2 will love this philosophical thing... I'm working on a proof of the statement "every statement, including this one, is both true and false".

Makes for a rather relative world...

sarah31 · 2004-06-29 02:32:00

btw who cares who distributes the app? sourceforge may use closed source but the fact is they have long been obvious supporters of open source. they could very well have not bothered.

it is all just conspiracy theories. apple too has closed source (duh they want to make money not scrape by) but they have made excellent contributions to the open source community.

any support is better than none.

xerxes2 · 2004-06-29 15:00:21

Dusty wrote:

i3839 wrote:
You can probably find two sites which say that any fact is both true and false.
Xerces2 will love this philosophical thing... I'm working on a proof of the statement "every statement, including this one, is both true and false".
Makes for a rather relative world...

I'm gonna tell you a little story Dusty.
Once upon a time there was an empire. In this empire there were two political parties and they were both right and wrong at the same time all the time. And while they were busy doing that, corporations were running the show.
End of story.

xerxes2 · 2004-06-29 15:05:54

sarah31 wrote:

btw who cares who distributes the app? sourceforge may use closed source but the fact is they have long been obvious supporters of open source. they could very well have not bothered.
it is all just conspiracy theories. apple too has closed source (duh they want to make money not scrape by) but they have made excellent contributions to the open source community.
any support is better than none.

what "excellent contributions to the open source community" has apple made? Bah, to me they are one of the most "evil" companys in the world. They seems to be doing better now when they are moving over to show biz instead.
Dont tell me, Steve Jobs is a genius and you are a mac zealot.

sarah31 · 2004-06-29 15:28:00

xerxes2 wrote:

[
what "excellent contributions to the open source community" has apple made? Bah, to me they are one of the most "evil" companys in the world. They seems to be doing better now when they are moving over to show biz instead.
Dont tell me, Steve Jobs is a genius and you are a mac zealot.

they have made more contributions than you have made. they helped developed some of the XFree86 code (prior to 4.4.0) and they have contributed in other areas. the core of their OS is open source, and so forth.

oh and if you think companies like apple or ms are bad and avoid them like the plague then why do you use a computer at all? the technology in front of you is all proprietary. while there are commonalities in design principles the technology in fron of you is largely closed. with that proprietary device in front of you you can steal just about anything you like from people that have worked hard for it.

i think of the plebs at apple, ms, and at movie,television and music companies (large and small computer users steal from them all) that will be put out of work just so you can do something for free. .... yeah i tell you the computer part manufacturers must be laughing all the way to their gold encrusted limos.

oh and what about the technology you use to listen to your stolen music? proprietary.

like someone said earlier ..... grow up. before you condemn everything that is close source or proprietary take a look at yourself and the devices that surround you .. hell the world that surrounds you. the way you act it sounds like you just want a free ride no matter what it costs anyone else. do you think that by stealling music or protesting closed source software you are hurting the executives of these large corporations? no. what you are doing though is putting alot of people that can ill afford to to unemployed on the street. if you think that is propaganda then you really don't pay attent to the comings and going of big business.

the standsolid made a decision that he was free to make and that is what the open source community is all about. but there are many of you morally confused types out there that would deny people the right to choose how they use their computers and conduct their personal business.

i am not a fan of big business myself but it has its place. i just try and make sure that the big businesses i support conduct themselves in a respectable manner.

Dusty · 2004-06-29 15:45:23

True enough, but the whole model could be changed. I kinda liked the annaresti culture in "The Dispossessed" (Ursula K. Le Guin) No big businesses there, no possession either.

Dusty

iotc247 · 2004-06-29 16:13:07

So is it done yet.. Is there a working version.. If so do you mind editing the first post with a link unless i missed it already..

sarah31 · 2004-06-29 16:21:53

i think he has it on sourceforge

xerxes2 · 2004-06-29 19:31:00

sarah31 wrote:

xerxes2 wrote:
[
what "excellent contributions to the open source community" has apple made? Bah, to me they are one of the most "evil" companys in the world. They seems to be doing better now when they are moving over to show biz instead.
Dont tell me, Steve Jobs is a genius and you are a mac zealot.
they have made more contributions than you have made. they helped developed some of the XFree86 code (prior to 4.4.0) and they have contributed in other areas. the core of their OS is open source, and so forth.
oh and if you think companies like apple or ms are bad and avoid them like the plague then why do you use a computer at all? the technology in front of you is all proprietary. while there are commonalities in design principles the technology in fron of you is largely closed. with that proprietary device in front of you you can steal just about anything you like from people that have worked hard for it.
i think of the plebs at apple, ms, and at movie,television and music companies (large and small computer users steal from them all) that will be put out of work just so you can do something for free. .... yeah i tell you the computer part manufacturers must be laughing all the way to their gold encrusted limos.
oh and what about the technology you use to listen to your stolen music? proprietary.
like someone said earlier ..... grow up. before you condemn everything that is close source or proprietary take a look at yourself and the devices that surround you .. hell the world that surrounds you. the way you act it sounds like you just want a free ride no matter what it costs anyone else. do you think that by stealling music or protesting closed source software you are hurting the executives of these large corporations? no. what you are doing though is putting alot of people that can ill afford to to unemployed on the street. if you think that is propaganda then you really don't pay attent to the comings and going of big business.
the standsolid made a decision that he was free to make and that is what the open source community is all about. but there are many of you morally confused types out there that would deny people the right to choose how they use their computers and conduct their personal business.
i am not a fan of big business myself but it has its place. i just try and make sure that the big businesses i support conduct themselves in a respectable manner.

Closed proprietary standards are history. Software apps or amplifier designs or art are not standards.
Intel got x86 rights and cash in some money on it but there are other companys that tries to make x86 cpus. Other chipsets are open for anyone to make I think at least.
I don't think I'm morally confused either. As long as there is choice capitalism is no big problem is it? Big corporations means less choice, and bosses that are far away from real life.

mak · 2004-06-30 01:00:39

hiho.

has anyone pointed to >gnome-pkgtool< already? can be found here > http://gnome-pkgtool.sourceforge.net/index.shtml

as you see that's a slackware-pkgtool-gui, but i'm sure if there
is _S O M E_ need it could be ported quite easily ...

---

my 2cents on-topic: in general a gui isn't really necessary for pacman,
BUT with a good gui, for instance the one mentioned above, it could be useful[i love that build-dialog 8) ]

for ME a kde one isn't. sorry.

mak

standsolid · 2004-06-30 06:25:31

iotc247 wrote:

So is it done yet..

nope

jason · 2004-07-15 17:42:23

Why doesn't somebody just make an "pacman -> apt" thing and use an existing program like Synaptic?

Haakon · 2004-07-15 22:12:36

Ehm, thanks a lot for bumping this thread, I hadn't seen it until now. I've just spent a week intensively developing my own frontend. It probably does the same as pakman, but whatever! The more the merrier, and mine is for gtk2 anyway.

Will announce in some days.

Dusty · 2004-07-16 01:02:47

ooooo!

I can hardly wait till I have the time to write the "A comparison of the myriad of unofficial GUI pacman frontends" document.

standsolid · 2004-07-16 19:07:52

Dusty wrote:

ooooo!
I can hardly wait till I have the time to write the "A comparison of the myriad of unofficial GUI pacman frontends" document.

lol

qball · 2004-08-08 20:22:52

I once wrote this search program:

aCoder · 2004-08-12 19:27:46

ummmm... Why don't we start an official GUI? Of course, it would have to make everyone happy, so why don't I do it! Oh yeah, I don't really want to. However, the idea recently struck me of a rewrite of pacman in python. It shortly faded into darkness since no one will ever go for it unless they don't want to do it themselves, and that doesn't solve anything. I do love python though. It's very cool. I think it should be added to base just because of how cool it is...

Abaddon · 2004-08-12 20:54:25

qball wrote:

I once wrote this search program:

gtk ;/

qball · 2004-08-12 20:58:57

Abaddon wrote:

gtk ;/

so... where talking about a possible gui for pacman, not having a toolkit flamewar.

what is this anoying habbit of people to always complain.. It's the linux way.. don't like it, don't use it.

sarah31 · 2004-08-12 21:05:08

people know my opinion on a gui but i say again if people want it then get together and decide how to build it so that it meets users desires (ie possibly include the ability for it to use qt, gtk, or gtk2). To have so many differnt forms is just plain silly ... that is the debian way and not the arch way.

good luck.

Dusty · 2004-08-12 21:08:50

sarah31 wrote:

people know my opinion on a gui but i say again if people want it then get together and decide how to build it so that it meets users desires

Xentac was just telling me how difficult it is to get people organized and find a leader willing to lead... he's an astute individual.

Dusty

Arch Linux

#151 2004-06-28 15:27:44

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

#152 2004-06-28 15:28:48

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

#153 2004-06-28 17:39:10

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

#154 2004-06-28 21:37:50

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

#155 2004-06-28 23:22:03

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

#156 2004-06-29 02:32:00

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

#157 2004-06-29 15:00:21

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

#158 2004-06-29 15:05:54

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

#159 2004-06-29 15:28:00

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

#160 2004-06-29 15:45:23

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

#161 2004-06-29 16:13:07

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

#162 2004-06-29 16:21:53

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

#163 2004-06-29 19:31:00

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

#164 2004-06-30 01:00:39

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

#165 2004-06-30 06:25:31

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

#166 2004-07-15 17:42:23

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

#167 2004-07-15 22:12:36

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

#168 2004-07-16 01:02:47

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

#169 2004-07-16 19:07:52

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

#170 2004-08-08 20:22:52

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

#171 2004-08-12 19:27:46

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

#172 2004-08-12 20:54:25

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

#173 2004-08-12 20:58:57

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

#174 2004-08-12 21:05:08

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

#175 2004-08-12 21:08:50

Re: GUI pacman? [update: new screenshots on page 7]

Board footer