[blfs-support] Suggestions on Desktop Environment

Simon Geard delgarde at ihug.co.nz
Wed Dec 4 02:10:57 PST 2013


On Tue, 2013-12-03 at 20:22 -0500, Alan Feuerbacher wrote:
> I'm not far from choosing a Desktop Environment, which BLFS gives you 
> choices of KDE, XFCE, LXDE to install.
> 
> I use Gnome at work, an old version that comes with Redhat 5, and I 
> understand that new versions get mixed reviews in online forums. I have 
> no opinion, having no experience except with what comes with my Fedora 
> 19 host system.

Oh yes, I also use a Redhat 5 machine at work, and the Gnome version
that comes with that is absolutely ancient, even by Gnome 2 standards.
> 
> Why does BLFS not do Gnome? I see that Gnome depends on systemd which 
> BLFS does not support. Can anyone give me a few clues about the issues?

That's pretty much the reason - that LFS doesn't use systemd, but
current versions of Gnome basically can't run without it (technically
they can make do with ConsoleKit instead, but that's unmaintained, and
likely to break with future changes).

> 
> I've used KDE before, where I used to work, and I was quite happy with it.
> 
> Any comments on the relative merits of the three that BLFS recommends? 
> Beyond the brief introductions in the BLFS book?

It's a pretty contentious subject. Personally, I thing Gnome Shell is
the best of the lot - however, I'm aware that there are also a lot of
people who'd regard me as some kind of deranged lunatic for saying that,
because they think it's by far the worst.

KDE is decent, if not to my taste - and the build system was a nightmare
last time I tried it (admittedly, a few years ago). Can't really comment
on the others - I've never used LXDE, and the last time I looked at XFCE
was a decade ago...

Simon.




More information about the blfs-support mailing list