Graveman is dead project?

kramerxiita · 2008-04-19 17:22:32

The project Graveman is dead?

Since 2006 don't have any update.

ozar · 2008-04-19 18:00:49

Yeah, I think it's a goner, and that's too bad because it was a very nice lightweight burner. Maybe someone will take the project over and breathe some fresh life into it.

Ruckus · 2008-04-20 01:16:47

I used it once, I liked it a lot. It's a shame.

mojoman · 2008-07-18 21:17:20

Here I am surfing for lightweigt apps to use for my new Arch installation and what do I stumble on? Sad news...

I used to use Graveman a lot. It was available in, I think, Ubuntu Dapper and maybe even Feisty. It was also available in Debian Sarge but not in Etch (I just checked).

Too bad...

Last edited by mojoman (2008-07-18 21:17:55)

Roberth · 2008-07-18 23:02:55

Maybe give xfburn a try? the new version(0.3) got dvd burning support etc.

Last edited by Roberth (2008-07-18 23:03:13)

skottish · 2008-07-18 23:05:08

Don't forget about this one:

http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=47253

mojoman · 2008-07-19 07:39:56

Thanks. Those two might be an alternative but for now I'll stick with graveman, as long as it's in the repos and gets the job done there's really no need to change and I don't really care that they aren't introducing new bugs, no, ... I mean ... eeh ... features.

Anyway, I just started out with Arch a couple of days ago and for now just keep it on an old laptop so DVD-burning isn't necessary (though if I decide to pop in Arch on my desktop it would be, which I just might). xfburn isn't in the repos, is it?

moljac024 · 2008-07-19 08:29:37

There really is no alternative to k3b.

Anyway, why don't you just use Brasero ? GNOME deps ?

Procyon · 2008-07-19 10:50:51

I was a graveman user too. I only need it about once every one or two months.
I ended up installing bashburn. The way to burn a dvd by putting all the files yourself in /tmp/burn is a bit inconvenient, and I'm not sure if I set it up correctly, but it seems to be pretty nice.

mojoman · 2008-07-19 12:47:11

moljac024 wrote:

There really is no alternative to k3b.
Anyway, why don't you just use Brasero ? GNOME deps ?

K3b is nice but I wouldn't go as far as saying that there is no alternative to it. It's not like it's doing anything unique, is it? Still, I'll admit that what it does, it does surprisingly well, especiallty since it actually does more than one thing.

But yes, the issue is dependencies. I'm travelling light here, as the laptop I've installed on has seen it's best days. No Gnome and no KDE libs. (I've stretched as far as qt to be able to run opera but that's as far as I'll go.)

Anyway, burning CDs and even DVDs isn't really a problem to do with lightweight apps. Word processing, now that's another matter. The only light alternative I've found is Abiword and it pulls down every Gnome library in town, making a perfectly good lightweight app into bloatware...

abhidg · 2008-07-19 13:50:47

AFAIR, abiword can be compiled without gnome deps.

mojoman · 2008-07-19 14:14:13

abhidg wrote:

AFAIR, abiword can be compiled without gnome deps.

Really? I'll have to look into that, it would be a nice solution. Abiword is a good processor. I've been using it on Debian and I know it pulls some Gnome libraries there too but not anywhere near the amount that it pulls in Arch. Anyway, thanks for the heads-up.

/mojoman

ekerazha · 2008-07-19 15:00:57

GNOME deps/libs are like every other dep/lib.

Does it really make any difference if you load "gnomedep.so" or "light_burning_and_ui_dep.so"?

(Well, it's a bit simplistic but basically true)

Last edited by ekerazha (2008-07-19 15:05:12)

skottish · 2008-07-19 15:42:05

moljac024 wrote:

There really is no alternative to k3b.
Anyway, why don't you just use Brasero ? GNOME deps ?

K3B has to pull in a bunch of KDE. Brasero brings in a large part of Gnome. Type nautilus from the command line from your favorite WM and see what happens.

I also like Graveman. It's really too bad that it's not being developed anymore. It's a bit buggy, but it's still one of the coolest looking burners. Judd Vinet's pyburn looked a lot like it, but it needed a lot more functionality to be a full service burner.

heleos · 2008-07-19 16:23:57

There's a nerolinux in the AUR, unless you're sticking to opensource only

Diaz · 2008-07-20 02:23:38

nero is quite fine for me, it is a shame that i have to use pirated software on a linux machine... :'(

Gullible Jones · 2008-07-20 02:39:08

Record looks good... Ought to be in Community.

Lyceuhns · 2008-07-20 02:41:45

Im very happy with Nero 3 here, few dependences and no problems here with me.

Last edited by Lyceuhns (2008-07-20 02:47:28)

mojoman · 2008-07-20 06:51:17

Diaz wrote:

nero is quite fine for me, it is a shame that i have to use pirated software on a linux machine... :'(

Are we talking proprietary software or pirated software? I don't mind using the former but, on my Linux machines as least, I stay away from the latter.

Arch Linux

#1 2008-04-19 17:22:32

Graveman is dead project?

#2 2008-04-19 18:00:49

Re: Graveman is dead project?

#3 2008-04-20 01:16:47

Re: Graveman is dead project?

#4 2008-07-18 21:17:20

Re: Graveman is dead project?

#5 2008-07-18 23:02:55

Re: Graveman is dead project?

#6 2008-07-18 23:05:08

Re: Graveman is dead project?

#7 2008-07-19 07:39:56

Re: Graveman is dead project?

#8 2008-07-19 08:29:37

Re: Graveman is dead project?

#9 2008-07-19 10:50:51

Re: Graveman is dead project?

#10 2008-07-19 12:47:11

Re: Graveman is dead project?

#11 2008-07-19 13:50:47

Re: Graveman is dead project?

#12 2008-07-19 14:14:13

Re: Graveman is dead project?

#13 2008-07-19 15:00:57

Re: Graveman is dead project?

#14 2008-07-19 15:42:05

Re: Graveman is dead project?

#15 2008-07-19 16:23:57

Re: Graveman is dead project?

#16 2008-07-20 02:23:38

Re: Graveman is dead project?

#17 2008-07-20 02:39:08

Re: Graveman is dead project?

#18 2008-07-20 02:41:45

Re: Graveman is dead project?

#19 2008-07-20 06:51:17

Re: Graveman is dead project?

Board footer