Re: [OT] GentooLinux GNUstep Developer

[M. Grabert]

On Wed, 26 Nov 2003, Chris B. Vetter wrote:

> Take a look at http://boblib.sourceforge.net/ ...
>
>   As wonderful as GNUstep is...let's face it, it's huge. The
>   installation process isn't just a matter of the "./configure
>   && make && make install"- no, that would be too easy.
>
>   Instead, one must install the makefiles first, followed by the base.
>   THEN one must configure the defaults database for timezone and such,
>   install the gdomap service at boot, and run an environment
>   initialization script at login for every user.
>
>   Not to mention the dependency hell from the very start.

Don't speak about dependency hell.

GNOME/KDE? I agree.

GNUstep? I requires objc support (naturally), X11, maybe openssl.
and of course a development tools (make, binutils and so forth).
Nothing much really ...

> While this isn't entirely true, he/they are right. GNUstep needs to be
> easier (for a user John Doe) to install. It's easy enough for a
> developer and/or someone who essentially know what he's doing. While you
> CAN argue that John Doe isn't the target, I disagree -- because the
> majority doesn't know, doesn't want to know and doesn't care enough how
> and why. All they care about is "does it install in one go? if not, I'll
> ditch it".

What is wrong with compile-all ?

> On the other hand, no one will give a sh*t, whether GNUstep eventually
> installs smoothly on Debian, Gentoo or FlavourDistributionOfTheWeek if
> there's nothing, no Tool, no Application, no nifty Thing that draws
> attention.

Yes, true.
We need a set of popular/usefull GNUstep apps bundled, and have a
compile-all for them aswell.

Actually it would be a one-liner:
  for i in GNUstep-Tools/*; do cd $i; make && make install; cd ../..; done


Slan,
  Max