I used to use Ximian's gnome. However, using sid's gnome I don't see much difference b/w what I have and what they have. I think the Control Center is a little bit different (but big deal, same functionality) and the only thing that I saw on a ximian'ized redhat box that I didn't have was that battstatt applet (which is nicer than the default gnome one) which I packaged up, and I believe is available at http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~spotter/debian/
I'd assume that if there are other things missing here and there people would more more than willing to package them up. It makes life much easier to get a major package like gnome directly from debian (i.e. if you ever want to install something that depends on gnome that ximian doesn't package you could run into some major conflicts) shaya On Sun, 2001-11-25 at 23:02, jennyw wrote: > I've seen some posts here saying that people should not install Ximian Gnome > if they use Woody. Is there a reason why? I currently have Potato on a > system that I'm going to upgrade to Woody at one point. I was thinking of > installing Ximian Gnome on it in the meantime ... is this going to cause > huge problems? > > Should I just upgrade to Woody and not even bother with Ximian in the > meantime? > > Thanks! > > Jen > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED],yucs.org} http://yucs.org/~spotter/
