vidd at crosslink.net
Tue Feb 12 17:32:16 UTC 2008
> On 12/02/2008, *Lionel Le Folgoc* <mrpouit at ubuntu.com
> <mailto:mrpouit at ubuntu.com>> wrote:
> > So please refrain from perpetrating bogus ideas such as the above.
> * I justified the changes, just re-read your mails (yeah, that
> could be
> hard, but try, no, really, try again...):
> - gnome-screensaver has a huge security issue when xfwm4 compositing
> is enabled, and thus won't be seeded in xubuntu.
> I've elaborated on the signigicant advantages of g-s-s before, and I
> think they far outweight a marginal case as this. Realistically, how
> many people have xfwm4 compositing enabled? It's not like it's that
> much lighter than Compiz, while it's far less feature rich. It might
> be more stable but most people enabling compositing are willing to
> compromise stability for features.
> Also, what kind of security is this you're talking about? Can a
> malicious hacker connect to your computer over the internet and steal
> all your documents or make your computer crash? Can other users
> physically take the computer and log in to your account without using
> your password?
While knowing what kind of security issue would be nice to know, knowing
there is an application on my system with a known, unpatched security
issue is unacceptable, regardless of how "unimportant" it may be.
A know, non-security-related bug (with or without a know workaround) is
preferable to me then a know security hole.
> - gnome-mount does not integrate well with thunar/exo (double
> combo-box problem for example). Same issue here, it seems you are able
> to skip the explanations only to start your little war.
> Personally (though I think many will agree with me), I find a double
> confirmation window *far* less annoying then not being able to unmount
> my stuff at all due to permissions issues.
I dont mount and unmount drives, cd's, floppies, or other media, so my
opinion here is unimportant. I simply do not have working
experience to form a worthwhile opinion, so I would be inclined to
non-gnome if possible
> - xfce4-taskmanager: not buggy anymore since I reverted your broken
> upload, and it does integrate well with the rest of the xfce desktop.
> I don't see how it integrates better, but in any case,
> gnome-system-monitor has a lot of advantages. As I've mentioned
> before, just listing Xubuntu's version in the System tab is a huge
> benefit when trying to help people. Next to that, the Resources tab
> also provides useful information that you'd have to miss in
I ran both g-s-m and xfce4-taskmanager side by side
visually more appealing
using between 19-52 % of my CPU
using between 5-17 % of my CPU
Why would the user need this application except to shut down an
Granted, as a tech support tool, it may have some benefit. But
for the average user, how often are they actually going to use this
system tab once the system is running? The resource tab is a nice touch
that some users may find appealing....but those users are more likely
going to display that info in panel plugins or some other method, rather
then open g-s-m and leave it up. Does the File systems tab do anything
but give you a less detailed output of the cli command "df"?
I see no truely compelling reason for choosing g-s-m over
> Lionel Le Folgoc - https://launchpad.net/~mrpouit
> EEBA 555E 0CDE 92BB 3AF4 4AB3 45A0 357B 5179 5910
> And I forgot to mention it, but also a +1 for weighing the pros and
> cons from me. Please, I think I've clearly outlined what I think are
> the benefits of said applications, if you could consider those and see
> if the cons really outweigh these pros then say so.
If there is any flaws in my statements, I appologize in advance. I tried
to be as thoughtful as possible in my pro's and cons
More information about the xubuntu-devel