Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 6 Dec 2013 10:55:52 +0100
From:      Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de>
To:        Luca Ferrari <fluca1978@infinito.it>
Cc:        freebsd-questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>, iijima yoshino <iijimayoshino@gmail.com>
Subject:   Re: Why FreeBSD doesn't have a Gnome3 port?
Message-ID:  <20131206105552.c5dcbf28.freebsd@edvax.de>
In-Reply-To: <CAKoxK+6=CdtntMJ-MRe9AqmmRcHM3EN_5HqUOYHEA1NvFRmcjw@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <1386221592.4385.16.camel@debian> <CAKoxK+61HZPLR_xM7BC12dHc3y4eHPDCEvsRC8oQ_Jm1wUovnQ@mail.gmail.com> <1386253808.8359.5.camel@debian> <CAKoxK+6=CdtntMJ-MRe9AqmmRcHM3EN_5HqUOYHEA1NvFRmcjw@mail.gmail.com>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Fri, 6 Dec 2013 09:13:26 +0100, Luca Ferrari wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 3:30 PM, iijima yoshino <iijimayoshino@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Even the OpenBSD team accepts the Gnome3 ...
> > It seems the FreeBSD towards to a server-oriented way.
> >
> 
> Why server oriented, just because gnome3 is not supported?

I agree with your statement. FreeBSD has been and still is a
multi-purpose operating system, unlike some Linux distrubutions
that _could_ be used on a server, but are heavily tailored,
preinstalled and preconfigured for desktop use, and maybe even
a specific desktop use case (like multimedia, pentest, office).
Personally, I'm quite happy that I can use the same OS on my
home desktop and on my gaming PC as I use it on my servers. :-)



> Gnome3 is
> only _a_ desktop among the others. So who is making FreeBSD more
> "towards a server", FreeBSD itself or Gnome 3 that refuses to adopt
> other non-linux facilities?

This can be considered a problem, but I think it's simply a
decision (that has been made) followed by its consequences.
FreeBSD is not Linux. If the developers of a specific piece
of software, like the Gnome 3 environment, decide to rely on
what currently _only_ Linux can provide, it's fine. When they
continue to extend this approach, say, only support a specific
set of Linux distributions, for example "Debian-derived ones",
it's also fine. It will have its implications, but that's
nothing bad or wrong per se.



> If other unixes have gnome3 it simply means they have manpower and
> interest to port it. Not being a gnome3 user (actually, a gnome user
> at all), I don't care about porting a desktop that is not interested
> in being portable.

As you said, it's _possible_ to make Gnome 3 run on FreeBSD, but
it will probably a hard task. The Linux world is in continuous
movement and development, new features ride - and decline - nearly
every month. Take HAL as an example, and see it in this context:
FreeBSD's desktop environments like KDE and Gnome have been able
to perform auto-mounting of removable media for decades, relying
on portable system services. Then HAL came along and finally became
mandatory. As far as I know, it's already deprecated in Linux, but
FreeBSD still has it in its ports collection, making things work
that didn't need it before. Whenever something finally works, it
will be replaced by something nonportable and experimental. ;-)



-- 
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20131206105552.c5dcbf28.freebsd>