> > Can I really be the only user of Mate on Centos 7?? > > No, definitely not. I use MATE on C7, because Gnome is, how do I > say this politely..., um, horrible. Not a KDE fan either. > > Gnome-2.x wasn't broken, didn't need to be thrown away and > replaced by something completely different.Not broken, but full of bugs that will never get fixed. I did a while back rebuild the EPEL rpms for 1.20. There are spec files I could make available but I can't find the build environemnt setup now. It involves mock, a custom local repo to receive the fresh builds as you don't want to pull in the rpms from EPEL, and a build script that defines the order, among other things. If I have time next week I can try and locate everything.
isdtor wrote:> >>> Can I really be the only user of Mate on Centos 7?? >> >> No, definitely not. I use MATE on C7, because Gnome is, how do I >> say this politely..., um, horrible. Not a KDE fan either. >> >> Gnome-2.x wasn't broken, didn't need to be thrown away and replaced >> by something completely different. > > Not broken, but full of bugs that will never get fixed. > > I did a while back rebuild the EPEL rpms for 1.20. There are spec > files I could make available but I can't find the build environemnt > setup now. It involves mock, a custom local repo to receive the fresh > builds as you don't want to pull in the rpms from EPEL, and a build > script that defines the order, among other things. If I have time > next week I can try and locate everything.If Mate won't be (or may not be?) supported by EPEL, has anyone looked at similar alternatives? I came across 'Cinnamon' (which is available from EPEL) - does anyone have experience of Cinnamon (good/bad/otherwise) ? Thanks James Pearson
On 19/07/19 11:06 PM, James Pearson wrote:> isdtor wrote: >>>> Can I really be the only user of Mate on Centos 7?? >>> No, definitely not. I use MATE on C7, because Gnome is, how do I >>> say this politely..., um, horrible. Not a KDE fan either. >>> >>> Gnome-2.x wasn't broken, didn't need to be thrown away and replaced >>> by something completely different. >> Not broken, but full of bugs that will never get fixed.I keep seeing posts about alternative desktops - great, just another of the things that make linux the OS of choice - you have choice; even about which desktop management system you wish to use. I have not tried mate for a number of years, it was quite simple and basic to use, but also lacked some of the polish we see in the market place, I have tried KDE and usually just use gnome, at whatever iteration RH and CentOS put out. KDE out of the box a year or so ago caused me some major grief to do with files and indexes and loosing disk space, so I walked away. Gnome has not been kind to developers like myself, and those trying to do real work with their work-stations - things that once were easy have become more difficult, however I have found solutions to most of the problems the later releases have introduced. Why bring this up? Well I guess I agree with some of the sentiment expressed often by a regular group of list contributors, but I also find it going stale. Change in the IT world is a constant. Not all of it is progress, in the sense of getting closer to a particular goal. However, it must be recognised that there are many, many different goals out there, and many of those will not be convergent, thus some gain, others loose. So at the end of the day, we make our choice, and live with the consequences. I am looking forward to spinning up CentOS 8 in the next month or two and seeing what that works like for my particular mix of tasks. It seems RH has chosen to support gnome desktop, thus for better or worse, that's where I'll go too. CentOS has far too many other benefits for me to go elsewhere. HUGE thanks to all the CentOS team and those that offer their experience to help and assist others - it makes my computing world function more or less reliably and deterministically, and all under my ability to observe and use. Thanks for reading, please forgive my slightly off topic rant. Rob>> I did a while back rebuild the EPEL rpms for 1.20. There are spec >> files I could make available but I can't find the build environemnt >> setup now. It involves mock, a custom local repo to receive the fresh >> builds as you don't want to pull in the rpms from EPEL, and a build >> script that defines the order, among other things. If I have time >> next week I can try and locate everything. > If Mate won't be (or may not be?) supported by EPEL, has anyone looked > at similar alternatives? > > I came across 'Cinnamon' (which is available from EPEL) - does anyone > have experience of Cinnamon (good/bad/otherwise) ? > > Thanks > > James Pearson > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
isdtor writes:> > > > Can I really be the only user of Mate on Centos 7?? > > > > No, definitely not. I use MATE on C7, because Gnome is, how do I > > say this politely..., um, horrible. Not a KDE fan either. > > > > Gnome-2.x wasn't broken, didn't need to be thrown away and > > replaced by something completely different. > > Not broken, but full of bugs that will never get fixed. > > I did a while back rebuild the EPEL rpms for 1.20. There are spec files I could make available but I can't find the build environemnt setup now. It involves mock, a custom local repo to receive the fresh builds as you don't want to pull in the rpms from EPEL, and a build script that defines the order, among other things. If I have time next week I can try and locate everything.I have done the hard lifting and rebuilt mate 1.22 on CentOS 7. It's not without quirks, and I haven't actually installed and tested, but I'm willing to make the srpms available - without any commitments. This might make a good addition to Nux :)
Good job and thanks, but I won't add anything that overwrites EPEL. Can help with hosting it in a separate repo if you wish, though. --- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! On 2019-08-07 16:02, isdtor wrote:> isdtor writes: >> >> > > Can I really be the only user of Mate on Centos 7?? >> > >> > No, definitely not. I use MATE on C7, because Gnome is, how do I >> > say this politely..., um, horrible. Not a KDE fan either. >> > >> > Gnome-2.x wasn't broken, didn't need to be thrown away and >> > replaced by something completely different. >> >> Not broken, but full of bugs that will never get fixed. >> >> I did a while back rebuild the EPEL rpms for 1.20. There are spec >> files I could make available but I can't find the build environemnt >> setup now. It involves mock, a custom local repo to receive the fresh >> builds as you don't want to pull in the rpms from EPEL, and a build >> script that defines the order, among other things. If I have time next >> week I can try and locate everything. > > I have done the hard lifting and rebuilt mate 1.22 on CentOS 7. It's > not without quirks, and I haven't actually installed and tested, but > I'm willing to make the srpms available - without any commitments. > This might make a good addition to Nux :) > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On 8/7/19 8:02 AM, isdtor wrote:> isdtor writes: > >>>> Can I really be the only user of Mate on Centos 7?? >>> No, definitely not. I use MATE on C7, because Gnome is, how do I >>> say this politely..., um, horrible. Not a KDE fan either. >>> >>> Gnome-2.x wasn't broken, didn't need to be thrown away and >>> replaced by something completely different. >> Not broken, but full of bugs that will never get fixed. >> >> I did a while back rebuild the EPEL rpms for 1.20. There are spec files I could make available but I can't find the build environemnt setup now. It involves mock, a custom local repo to receive the fresh builds as you don't want to pull in the rpms from EPEL, and a build script that defines the order, among other things. If I have time next week I can try and locate everything. > I have done the hard lifting and rebuilt mate 1.22 on CentOS 7. It's not without quirks, and I haven't actually installed and tested, but I'm willing to make the srpms available - without any commitments. This might make a good addition to Nux :) >The person responsible for packaging the mate RPMs for EPEL offered to hand that off to someone, which I considered (since I'm a Fedora/EPEL packager), but was reluctant to offer without understanding how much heavy lifting was involved.? Also, I wasn't sure how much the mate on CentOS user community wants to stick with 1.16 vs. upgrade to 1.22.? What kind of "quirks" did you run into? -Greg