3 ms·

If I'm not mistaken one of the big goals of Lumina is to produce a desktop with its roots in BSD, since most (if not all) DEs currently in development got their

If I'm not mistaken one of the big goals of Lumina is to produce a desktop with its roots in BSD, since most (if not all) DEs currently in development got their start on Linux. I imagine the idea is to develop Lumina as part of a single-piece OS, BSD-style, as opposed to the Linux model where everything is developed independently and then glued together to form a distro.

int_19h 10y ago
It still feels like it'd make more sense to at least fork something existing (or better yet, find a desktop that doesn't mind BSD-specific conditional code inclusion). I mean, the one-base-system mentality doesn't preclude the BSDs from using gcc and/or Clang - even though they weren't developed for BSD specifically, they are clearly the best available choice. I wonder why not Xfce, specifically. Of all the DEs out there, it seems most complete in a sense of being an actual DE, with the usual configurability and stock apps that one would expect (a great file manager, for one). But at the same time, it's not the mammoth that Gnome and KDE are, gets out of the way easily enough, and doesn't demand that applications are aware of its existence beyond following XDG specs.
- digi_owl 10y ago
  Not sure, but i think XFCE relies on a fair bit of Gnome plumbing, and that pluming in turn is becoming increasingly systemd-centric. Not even sure how well GTK3 plays with BSDs, and XFCE will move to using GTK3 "soon".
  - int_19h 10y ago
    I don't think that's the case, at least not anymore. I'm running Xfce on two systems, one of which is Gentoo (in the default OpenRC configuration, no systemd), and the other is FreeBSD. Neither has Gnome installed - just recently I had to actually install gconf to do something, as a matter of fact, and was surprised that it wasn't there - but they handle Xfce just fine. I believe it used Gnome settings daemon at some point, but it has its own these days.
gribbly 10y ago
>I imagine the idea is to develop Lumina as part of a single-piece OS That makes no sense to me, given that it runs on Linux as well as BSD. From what I've read it relies on Qt, Fluxbox, XScreensaver etc, which are hardly BSD based components. >as opposed to the Linux model where everything is developed independently and then glued together to form a distro. What's the difference here ? Lumina is developed independently, the components Lumina builds upon are developed independently of Lumina, it is then glued together with PC-BSD into TrueOS.
fnj 10y ago
No, Nothing about Lumina ties it to BSD. On the contrary; it's fundamentally easily portable to any OS. It runs just fine on Arch linux. The "idea" was to generate a basic DE that is not mired into any lame dependencies such as systemd.

int_19h 10y ago

It still feels like it'd make more sense to at least fork something existing (or better yet, find a desktop that doesn't mind BSD-specific conditional code inclusion). I mean, the one-base-system mentality doesn't preclude the BSDs from using gcc and/or Clang - even though they weren't developed for BSD specifically, they are clearly the best available choice. I wonder why not Xfce, specifically. Of all the DEs out there, it seems most complete in a sense of being an actual DE, with the usual configurability and stock apps that one would expect (a great file manager, for one). But at the same time, it's not the mammoth that Gnome and KDE are, gets out of the way easily enough, and doesn't demand that applications are aware of its existence beyond following XDG specs.

digi_owl 10y ago
Not sure, but i think XFCE relies on a fair bit of Gnome plumbing, and that pluming in turn is becoming increasingly systemd-centric. Not even sure how well GTK3 plays with BSDs, and XFCE will move to using GTK3 "soon".
- int_19h 10y ago
  I don't think that's the case, at least not anymore. I'm running Xfce on two systems, one of which is Gentoo (in the default OpenRC configuration, no systemd), and the other is FreeBSD. Neither has Gnome installed - just recently I had to actually install gconf to do something, as a matter of fact, and was surprised that it wasn't there - but they handle Xfce just fine. I believe it used Gnome settings daemon at some point, but it has its own these days.

gribbly 10y ago

>I imagine the idea is to develop Lumina as part of a single-piece OS That makes no sense to me, given that it runs on Linux as well as BSD. From what I've read it relies on Qt, Fluxbox, XScreensaver etc, which are hardly BSD based components. >as opposed to the Linux model where everything is developed independently and then glued together to form a distro. What's the difference here ? Lumina is developed independently, the components Lumina builds upon are developed independently of Lumina, it is then glued together with PC-BSD into TrueOS.

fnj 10y ago

No, Nothing about Lumina ties it to BSD. On the contrary; it's fundamentally easily portable to any OS. It runs just fine on Arch linux. The "idea" was to generate a basic DE that is not mired into any lame dependencies such as systemd.