[linux-elitists] Microsoft prizes for rat finks

Aaron Lehmann aaronl@vitelus.com
Mon May 7 19:23:45 PDT 2001


On Sun, Apr 29, 2001 at 11:52:29PM -0700, Rick Moen wrote:
> Package: konqueror

I went ahead and tried it again, just to be on the same page as you.

> [...]
> Depends: kdelibs3 (>= 4:2.1.1-0), lesstif1, libc6 (>= 2.2.2-2),
> libjpeg62, libko nq3 (>= 4:2.1.1-0), libpng2, libqt2 (>=
> 2:2.3.0-final-0) | libqt2-gl (>= 2:2.3.0 -final-0),
> libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2, xlibs (>= 4.0.1-11), zlib1g (>= 1:1.1.3), kde
> base-libs (>= 4:2.1.1-6), libkonq3 (>= 4:2.1.1-6), debconf

Right, but the dependency tree contains packages such as the cdparanoia
library and libkmid2 (??). I wonder if KDE would relinquish these
dependencies if I compiled it myself, with custom options.

> And Mozilla and Navigator/Communicator don't?  Looks to me like the
> "file manager" capabilities described at
> http://www.konqueror.org/konq-filemanager.html aren't much more than
> incidental to any browser's ability to browse file: URLs.

Navigator doesn't have a trash can.

If KDE is indeed modular, I wonder how hard it could be to make a
simple browser-only browser: no trash can, no fancy file: URL viewing,
no complex embedded viewerse.

Konqueror looks quite nice. I really like its cookie management. It
feels more down-to-earth, stabler, and more Zen than mozilla. As you
may have noticed, I'm just not easily satisfied >;-).

It would have been really nice had they done us (and embedded systems
users!) a favor and writen the HTML renderer to render to Xlib (I
presume it is heavily based on Qt and C++). I wonder if it would be
portable enough to port away from Qt. The Gnome folks seem to have
pulled that off, but we all know how they bungled that project.



More information about the linux-elitists mailing list