GNOME on cygwin

GNOME on cygwin

[Raul Acevedo]

I'm a little confused about GNOME on Cygwin.  Cygwin installer claims to have a whole GNOME section, but I can't find basic applications like gnome-terminal or gnome-text-editor.  Google shows there are ports of GNOME for Cygwin; but then why does the installer have a GNOME section that only seems to have libraries and bitmaps?

Thanks,

Raul

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://x.cygwin.com/docs/
FAQ:                   http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/

Re: GNOME on cygwin

[Larry Hall (Cygwin X)]

On 8/4/2010 2:20 PM, Raul Acevedo wrote:
> I'm a little confused about GNOME on Cygwin.  Cygwin installer claims to have
> a whole GNOME section, but I can't find basic applications like
> gnome-terminal or gnome-text-editor.  Google shows there are ports of GNOME
> for Cygwin; but then why does the installer have a GNOME section that only
> seems to have libraries and bitmaps?

Because those ports aren't part of the distribution and are, therefore,
not supported by cygwin.com.

-- 
Larry Hall                              http://www.rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc.                      (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
216 Dalton Rd.                          (508) 893-9889 - FAX
Holliston, MA 01746

_____________________________________________________________________

A: Yes.
> Q: Are you sure?
>> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
>>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email?

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://x.cygwin.com/docs/
FAQ:                   http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/

Re: GNOME on cygwin

[Raul Acevedo]

So why are there GNOME packages in Cygwin?  What is actually in them?

On Aug 4, 2010, at 4:34 PM, Larry Hall (Cygwin X) wrote:

> On 8/4/2010 2:20 PM, Raul Acevedo wrote:
>> I'm a little confused about GNOME on Cygwin.  Cygwin installer claims to have
>> a whole GNOME section, but I can't find basic applications like
>> gnome-terminal or gnome-text-editor.  Google shows there are ports of GNOME
>> for Cygwin; but then why does the installer have a GNOME section that only
>> seems to have libraries and bitmaps?
> 
> Because those ports aren't part of the distribution and are, therefore,
> not supported by cygwin.com.
> 
> -- 
> Larry Hall                              http://www.rfk.com
> RFK Partners, Inc.                      (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
> 216 Dalton Rd.                          (508) 893-9889 - FAX
> Holliston, MA 01746
> 
> _____________________________________________________________________
> 
> A: Yes.
>> Q: Are you sure?
>>> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
>>>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email?
> 
> --
> Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
> Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
> Documentation:         http://x.cygwin.com/docs/
> FAQ:                   http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://x.cygwin.com/docs/
FAQ:                   http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/

Re: GNOME on cygwin

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 12:43:11PM -0700, Raul Acevedo wrote:
>So why are there GNOME packages in Cygwin?  What is actually in them?

http://cygwin.com/packages/

would answer that question for you.

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://x.cygwin.com/docs/
FAQ:                   http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/

Re: GNOME on cygwin

[Raul Acevedo]

My real question is what is the point of these packages, if GNOME is not actually in them.  It's a bit confusing and I wasted a chunk of time trying to install GNOME through Cygwin only to find out it's not possible.

Thanks,

Raul

On Aug 4, 2010, at 1:24 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 12:43:11PM -0700, Raul Acevedo wrote:
>> So why are there GNOME packages in Cygwin?  What is actually in them?
> 
> http://cygwin.com/packages/
> 
> would answer that question for you.
> 
> --
> Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
> Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
> Documentation:         http://x.cygwin.com/docs/
> FAQ:                   http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://x.cygwin.com/docs/
FAQ:                   http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/

RE: GNOME on cygwin

[Timares, Brian (HP)]

Raul Acevedo wrote:
>My real question is what is the point of these packages, if GNOME is
not
>actually in them.  It's a bit confusing and I wasted a chunk of time
trying to
>install GNOME through Cygwin only to find out it's not possible.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Raul
>
>On Aug 4, 2010, at 1:24 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 12:43:11PM -0700, Raul Acevedo wrote:
>>> So why are there GNOME packages in Cygwin?  What is actually in
them?
>>
>> http://cygwin.com/packages/

Raul, please stop replying above quoted text.  I believe you are asked
that when you sign up for the mail list (no?), but Larry Hall's
signature says that, in a humorous way:
A: Yes.
> Q: Are you sure?
>> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
>>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email?

Here is my answer to your question.  Disclaimer: I'm pretty sure I'm
right, I don't _know_ I'm right.

Some nice programs that rely on pieces of Gnome are installable with
Cygwin.  Since they require bits and pieces of Gnome those pieces get
installed.

Example.

When I run setup.exe and select Lilypond (for printing sheet music) 3
additional items get automatically selected on my system. If I deselect
them I get "Warning! Unmet Dependencies Found" and it says I need glib,
gtk+, and qt3.  Apparently I already have gtk-engines from some other
program.  I suspect there is a programmer/musician out there who ported
it.

By the way, I believe I understand Larry's answer.  He was telling you,
essentially, that Cygwin is not a way to get Gnome installed, rather, a
way to run specific Unix-like programs on a Windows PC.  You don't get
gnome-terminal because no one has ported it.

Understanding this, I checked the Cygwin/X FAQ.  I saw "10.1. Is there a
list of software that has been ported to Cygwin/X?"  It struck me that
might lead to something useful, which it does, it says "The CygGnome
project aims to port Gnome to Cygwin/X."
<http://cygnome.sourceforge.net/>

So essentially, you were confused because the Gnome section implied you
could get full-on Gnome.  Why is there that section?  Beats me.


Brian <-= I'm just glad I can get X Windows from my servers

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://x.cygwin.com/docs/
FAQ:                   http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/

Re: GNOME on cygwin

[Larry Hall (Cygwin X)]

On 8/4/2010 6:33 PM, Timares, Brian (HP) wrote:
> Raul Acevedo wrote:
>> My real question is what is the point of these packages, if GNOME is
>> not actually in them.  It's a bit confusing and I wasted a chunk of time
>> trying to install GNOME through Cygwin only to find out it's not possible.

Brian, you misunderstand what Gnome is, since the Cygwin distribution
contains many packages that make up Gnome.  See below for more.

<snip>

> Here is my answer to your question.  Disclaimer: I'm pretty sure I'm
> right, I don't _know_ I'm right.
>
> Some nice programs that rely on pieces of Gnome are installable with
> Cygwin.  Since they require bits and pieces of Gnome those pieces get
> installed.

Yep.

<snip>

> By the way, I believe I understand Larry's answer.  He was telling you,
> essentially, that Cygwin is not a way to get Gnome installed, rather, a
> way to run specific Unix-like programs on a Windows PC.  You don't get
> gnome-terminal because no one has ported it.

That's not entirely true since, as you mentioned below, there are ports
out there (Cygwin Ports being the most comprehensive and a better source
for all-that-is-Gnome).  But, as I think is clear, there's a difference
between someone's personal collection of software ported to Cygwin (and
possibly conveniently packaged like Cygwin Ports) and the Cygwin distribution.
The biggest difference is packages in the Cygwin distribution are
maintained and cygwin.com supports them.  This cannot be said for other
sites.

cygwin.com is not a loose collection of ported software brought under one
roof by an installer.  It is a distribution and only those things in the
distribution are provided and supported.

> Understanding this, I checked the Cygwin/X FAQ.  I saw "10.1. Is there a
> list of software that has been ported to Cygwin/X?"  It struck me that
> might lead to something useful, which it does, it says "The CygGnome
> project aims to port Gnome to Cygwin/X."
> <http://cygnome.sourceforge.net/>
>
> So essentially, you were confused because the Gnome section implied you
> could get full-on Gnome.  Why is there that section?  Beats me.

The short answer is that it's there to house all-that-is-Gnome.  It just
doesn't contain everything yet.  With some luck, it will someday.  In the
meantime, there are allot of packages that make up Gnome.  Since the
distribution has some of them now, it makes sense to put them in this
category.  The same is true for KDE, Perl, etc.

-- 
Larry Hall                              http://www.rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc.                      (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
216 Dalton Rd.                          (508) 893-9889 - FAX
Holliston, MA 01746

_____________________________________________________________________

A: Yes.
> Q: Are you sure?
>> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
>>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email?

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://x.cygwin.com/docs/
FAQ:                   http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/

Re: GNOME on cygwin

[Raul Acevedo]

> The short answer is that it's there to house all-that-is-Gnome.  It just
> doesn't contain everything yet.  With some luck, it will someday.  In the
> meantime, there are allot of packages that make up Gnome.  Since the
> distribution has some of them now, it makes sense to put them in this
> category.  The same is true for KDE, Perl, etc.

I appreciate the detailed response.  Hopefully Cygwin will contain a full GNOME package someday.

Thanks,

Raul

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://x.cygwin.com/docs/
FAQ:                   http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/

Re: GNOME on cygwin

[John J. McDonough]

On Wed, 2010-08-04 at 23:04 -0400, Larry Hall (Cygwin X) wrote:
> On 8/4/2010 6:33 PM, Timares, Brian (HP) wrote:
> > Raul Acevedo wrote:
> >> My real question is what is the point of these packages, if GNOME is
> >> not actually in them.  It's a bit confusing and I wasted a chunk of time
> >> trying to install GNOME through Cygwin only to find out it's not possible.
> 
> Brian, you misunderstand what Gnome is, since the Cygwin distribution
> contains many packages that make up Gnome.  See below for more.

<big snip>

> The short answer is that it's there to house all-that-is-Gnome.  It just
> doesn't contain everything yet.  With some luck, it will someday.  In the
> meantime, there are allot of packages that make up Gnome.  Since the
> distribution has some of them now, it makes sense to put them in this
> category.  The same is true for KDE, Perl, etc.

Something that should be mentioned.  GNOME is a huge, lumbering system
with ten or twelve zillion libraries.  Lots of programs rely on those
libraries, but no program relies on all of them.  As you port a program
you may also need to port libraries that it requires, and a LOT of the
time, those libraries are going to be part of GNOME.

KDE is similar, although perhaps not quite as massive as GNOME.  Many of
the other desktops were developed specifically to avoid the huge
overhead of GNOME and KDE.  But of course, as soon as you install a
program built on one of those foundations, you need to pull in the
associated libraries, and take the associated performance hit.

GNOME is also undergoing a huge change.  It probably wouldn't make a lot
of sense to put a great deal of effort into a GNOME port at this point
in time when the whole GNOME world will change in a few months.

--McD



--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://x.cygwin.com/docs/
FAQ:                   http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/

Re: GNOME on cygwin

[Yaakov (Cygwin/X)]

On Wed, 2010-08-04 at 21:37 -0400, John J. McDonough wrote:
> Something that should be mentioned.  GNOME is a huge, lumbering system
> with ten or twelve zillion libraries.  Lots of programs rely on those
> libraries, but no program relies on all of them.  As you port a program
> you may also need to port libraries that it requires, and a LOT of the
> time, those libraries are going to be part of GNOME.

Actually, GNOME has gone on a diet over the last few years, obsoleting
entire libraries and moving similar but improved functionality into a
smaller set of libraries.  Also remember that every single library is
packaged separately, unlike KDE (where kdelibs cannot practically be
split up).  Still, the distro is around ten to fifteen libraries short
of providing the dependencies for the vast majority of GNOME programs.

Since there are already in Ports, why aren't these in the distro?  I
already maintain a proportionally large number of the distro packages,
and there is legitimate concern that having too many packages maintained
by one volunteer would lead to a difficult situation for the rest of the
distro if said volunteer were to leave the project for whatever reason
(a seemingly inevitable situation in community-run FOSS projects).
OTOH, I do feel that Cygwin would be a much better product with the
GNOME and KDE libraries and applications commonly found in Linux
distros, and I've lost count of how many people struggle to build things
which are already available for, but not shipped with, Cygwin.

Personally, I think it would benefit RH to actually hire people to focus
on Cygwin as a distribution (Corinna's focus is on newlib/winsup).  But
then again, that's probably just wishful thinking on my part (currently
looking for work).

> KDE is similar, although perhaps not quite as massive as GNOME.

Having built and used both, I would disagree, but I don't want this to
become a GNOME v. KDE flame war.

> Many of the other desktops were developed specifically to avoid the huge
> overhead of GNOME and KDE.  But of course, as soon as you install a
> program built on one of those foundations, you need to pull in the
> associated libraries, and take the associated performance hit.

That depends on what you mean by "GNOME" and "KDE": the desktop, or the
applications?  While these and other desktops can be built for Cygwin --
and I have done so in the past, mostly as proof-of-concept (and the
obligatory screenshots) -- they tend to be awfully slow (due to IPC?)
and IMHO rather unnecessary on Cygwin.  For instance, I run XWin in
multiwindow mode, a partial-length fbpanel on screen top, and the
dozen-or-so (mostly GTK/GNOME) apps which I use on a daily basis.

If, like me, your focus is running applications, then you need the
GTK/GNOME and Qt/KDE libraries; with the exception of Xfce, the other
desktops don't provide anything additional for programs.

> GNOME is also undergoing a huge change.  It probably wouldn't make a lot
> of sense to put a great deal of effort into a GNOME port at this point
> in time when the whole GNOME world will change in a few months.

GNOME 3.0 isn't architecturally as big of a change as the version would
indicate.  Because GLib/GTK+ development is "in-house", they have very
wisely made the transition gradual and smooth, whereas KDE had no choice
but to break things in 4.0 because Trolltech had done so between Qt 3
and 4.

Furthermore, GNOME 3.0 just got pushed off until next spring, so this
fall's release will be a more ordinary 2.32, with only a preview of GTK
3.0 and friends.  That leaves enough time to justify continuing with the
non-deprecated parts of 2.x, should we so choose.


Yaakov



--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://x.cygwin.com/docs/
FAQ:                   http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/

Re: GNOME on cygwin

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 11:48:35PM -0500, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
>Since there are already in Ports, why aren't these in the distro?  I
>already maintain a proportionally large number of the distro packages,
>and there is legitimate concern that having too many packages maintained
>by one volunteer would lead to a difficult situation for the rest of the
>distro if said volunteer were to leave the project for whatever reason
>(a seemingly inevitable situation in community-run FOSS projects).
>OTOH, I do feel that Cygwin would be a much better product with the
>GNOME and KDE libraries and applications commonly found in Linux
>distros, and I've lost count of how many people struggle to build things
>which are already available for, but not shipped with, Cygwin.

I have absolutely no problem with your adding more packages to the
distro, Yaakov.  I'm sure Corinna would not disagree.

I think it would cut down on some confusion if we had more of GNOME in
Cygwin.

(Even though I normally use KDE)

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://x.cygwin.com/docs/
FAQ:                   http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/