On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 11:03 PM, Olav Vitters <olav@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > E.g. as an executable (e.g. shell script) that handles the installation. > That is how a lot of commercial programs do it. The shell has the binary > stuff appended to it. > > Anyway, the distribution of 'Apps' (or game, etc) was part of the > Developers Hackfest that was held before FOSDEM. At the moment if you > distribute something you need to put in some effort to ensure it works > nicely. I've installed some proprietary software where the instructions > suggested terminal use, but just as well you can open the .tar.gz and > then run the shell script. I've seen such things (shell script as installer) either. > Loads of GNOME/Linux advice is in the form of things to run on the > command line. From that you cannot infer that for GNOME/Linux you need > the command line. Only that most advice suggests that. I consider this as a problem. Why command line seems to be a must when using desktop systems based on existing Free Software? ( I use terminal even on OSX boxes. Don't use Windows very often these days. ) > For fun, try finding out if you can do graphically what is suggested to > be done on the command line. A GUI might be more inconvenient, but > usually it is just as well possible. Still, copy/pasting a command is > easier than writing down all the buttons to click and where they are in > some GUI. Try give such arguments to a regular visitor of Neowin? I view GUI as a usage pattern; it is not the best all the times but some people are just fan of it. I hope GNOME/Free Software GUI can cover more common tasks, indeed. > No, I was not talking about usage patterns. I said that if an > application is distributed within Windows, things are done to ensure > that you do not need any manual steps. Well, we can also use ZIP package or "portable" package. Windows software distribution is a mess, :-) But those who created launchers want to create launchers I guess; as I mentioned, there is some use cases not matter you consider them edge or not. > If you distribute things for GNOME and then do not offer a good > experience (.desktop file), then it is not GNOME that is broken. It is somehow like distributing Windows software with a shortcut. Thus a package or installer is required. But I personally prefer portable applications actually, since I want to use new applications even if I'm not root. > Depending on my mood: > a. I'd return it and buy another one > b. Maybe Google for a solution > > I still do not get what you're after. You want to use a desktop > environment designed to handle 'non working hardware'? That maybe once > you follow some instructions you found via Google? No, but I expect it provides a Device Manage work-alike, which can identify the chip of the hardware. It is always annoying when some newbies in whatever channel ask about hardware issues and Linux experts have to explain how to use terminal as well. _______________________________________________ gnome-list mailing list gnome-list@xxxxxxxxx https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-list
