I compiled KDE2 from ports three months ago on then-current on a Miata
500a.  No errors, but it was slow as to be unusable; almost like a
run-of-the-mill Windows GUI hang.  Twenty minutes to boot into KDE.  Even
running a qt app would bring the system to a trickle.

KDE1 didn't exhibit this behavior.

I abandoned it for gnome-core and windowmaker, which doesn't exhibit the
timing bug, whatever it is.  But I, too, would love to see KDE2 (and KDE3)
on NetBSD-Alpha.

-dhop

Dave McGuire wrote:
> 
> On December 13, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> > >   This is a great big bummer.  I hadn't even looked...I'd never have
> > > thought that DEC (or what's left of them) would solder such a chip.
> > >
> > >   Oh well.
> > >
> > >   Say, anyone have any luck getting KDE2 built under 1.5.2?  It seems
> > > to be about the least portable piece of software around...now I'm
> >
> > You can always find worse. Try to compile gnome :)
> 
>   Yeah...after about ten hours of fixing Gnome portability issues
> under IRIX, I gave up and deleted the source trees in total
> frustration.
> 
>   It makes me wonder if these folks actually *try* to write
> nonportable code.  I mean, it's C++ which apparently exists so that
> people *can* write nonportable code, but what's the motivation?
> 
>   All I want is a decent desktop environment.  I like KDE a *lot*.
> I'd even give up my beloved SGI R10K box and switch to a different
> desktop platform (but not a PeeCee, thank you) like an Alpha running
> NetBSD (which I'm currently building to examine the feasibility of the
> idea) to get something other than a run-of-the-mill window manager.
> 
>   Any suggestions?
> 
>     Totally frustrated but trying to remain in good spririts,
>        -Dave
> 
> --
> Dave McGuire
> St. Petersburg, FL