michael.pyne at kdemail.net
Wed May 17 14:44:05 BST 2006
On Tuesday 16 May 2006 18:13, Krzysztof Lichota wrote:
> Guillaume Laurent napisał(a):
> > On Tuesday 16 May 2006 20:40, Michael Pyne wrote:
> >> But for that use case, we wouldn't need the separation between ksysguard
> >> and ksysguardd (the C daemon that actually collects the data) anyways.
> > My point exactly. I use an applet named 'system monitor', there are also
> > dozens of SuperKaramba modules for that too.
> Separation of frontend (ksysguard) and backend (ksysguardd) is good as
> it allows switching backends (for example for some common backend for
> Gnome and KDE).
> As for applets, I use them also, but they do not have, for example,
> processes list, they do not allow killing processes, etc.
> Ksysguard is just a standard processes manager which people can rely
> will be there, just like Task Manager (or whatever it is called) in
Or if we go the "make a system stats lib that doesn't suck" route we could
just use that. i.e. ksysguard uses libstat, the applets use libstat, GNOME
uses libstat, etc.
As it stands GNOME can't depend on ksysguardd, as it's not even released
No one is saying ksysguard should go, just that it's probably overengineered
for what it does. :)
- Michael Pyne
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the kde-core-devel