Porpoisepower wrote: "A build for Linux/Unix Boxes would be really nice."

DeViLbOi wrote: "A Linux build for a windows shell replacement. For some reason I don't think it will work."

Then an admin locked the thread "this thread is locked!!"


Ok, firstly Devilboi, this is a decent request.
I think you misunderstood it.

Porpoise said "A build for Linux" not "A build of Linux:

S/he is simply requesting a build of ls for linux, which is a wicked request and has been made many times before (on the lsml for instance).

Many ls users are thinking about migrating to linux (those that havent allready that is) if Vista sucks. I know I am, and I was thinking about it ages ago too (instead of getting XP).

A linux version of ls would rock. But all the modules would have to be recompiled too, whitch is a hell of a task imo.

Still, the request is a good one Dev, you shouldnt have locked it so hastily ;p

I'd soooo be using Linux if it wasn't for game support.

It was locked because LS can't be ported. The wonderful Windows API used in LS isn't available in Linux and so far nobody has cared enough to try and start to write a window manager from scratch. There was also the problem with the conversion of windows modules over to Linux. Also not possible. So...why is it that I would let the thread stay?

Dev: Some generous coder might decide to convert the core to linux because of this thread ;)

A larger Database means more work when issue's arise.
I am assuming Dev is looking out for a database full of
useless threads.

And what if the Dude requested a port to mac osx?

I am not saying Dev doesn't have a trigger finger tho. lol

its not even the database size...its not deleted...its just locked because I don't want some moron a year from now saying "where is the linux build?"

and fractal...its not just the core...its every module and every theme. nothing would carry over...it would just be a Linux window manager with plugins...which I believe is already called fvwm2.

Dev: I havent tried any linux wm's yet, so I dont know. I am just sticking up for the people that posted to lsml saying that nothing on linux even compares to ls.

I dont think that hiding it so some moron a year from now saying "where is the linux build?" is a good tactic either.
Thats just... silly :)

Anyway I will shutup now as my "gnutz" hurt from you kicking them on irc. (Me a moron? atleast i am not a ls facist! :p j/k Dev.)

ls fascist, lol.

I agree with Dev, the number of topped idiotic threads topped with idiotic posts is rediculus. Half the time the post is "yeah, I agree", or a "lolz@you!!~1"

It's annoying.

I say lock every thread after 2 posts. 1 question, 1 answer. Period ;)

Hile DeViLbOi! :P

There is active discussion about "litestep for linux" on the lsml at the moment.

I think fallout wants to make it so future builds will run on linux and windows, and that all the modules dont have to be recoded... or something

how can a module not need to be recoded? you gonna write it in assembler?

no, I dont know how he wants to do it, something about WineLib or something... check out his mails on gmane or something

a wm dependant on wine is gonna be slow as sheeeeit.

yeah, thats what someone said :/

http://wuzzle.org/archive?4:mss:75809:niffcgopkloabjjjbgma