Truth is - you don't need gnome panel. Both gnome and KDE
are nothing but a
collection of applications based on the same standard libs,
having more
standardized policy etc. What you refer to as running gnome
is just having a
GNOME panel running. If you don't like it - there is no
reason to run the thing.
All GNOME applications would work just fine w/o panel.
And btw, GNOME doesn't require E. It's just a dependency in
RPMS. I am running
GNOME + fvwm here, new devel tree has full gnome support. I
believe IceWM and
some others have it as well.
- Lev
> When I started using Linux I cut my teeth on KDE, it helped me get up to
> speed quickly, very Windows like.
> When I installed RedHat 6.1, I gave Gnome, running on top of E, a try
> for a long while.
> Since then I have tried Blackbox, Sawmill and now I just run plain E
> with the blueheart theme.
> My question is what if any advantages are there to running Gnome on top
> of E. E seems to run all Gnome and KDE apps just fine, the memory
> footprint is small and Netscape seems to be more stable. E has a pager,
> iconbox and a menu system a mouse click away.
> My system is running just fine but I feel like I am getting away with
> something and I don't know what it is.
> My system:
> Pentium 200mhz, 128mb ram, Matrox Millennium II 4mb
> --
> hcg
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
evil in itself; I just think they |
make really crappy | irc: CrazyLion,
operating systems." |
- Linus Torvalds | Linux forever!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by