Re: Kde 1 or 2 on NetBSd 5.x

[Larry Stotler <larrystotler%gmail.com@localhost>]

On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 9:04 AM, David Brownlee <abs%absd.org@localhost> wrote:
> Another thought might be to try installing a NetBSD mips port under
> qemu or gxemul on a fast machine and build natively on an emulated
> mips box with fast IO and lots of memory.

Hmmm.  I have a 6 core AMD system running Linux.  I could probably try
it on that.

> Probably, but it would be quite awkward are you would need to link
> them against 5.x libraries and suchlike. As a general rule anything
> built under NetBSD will run on that version or anything later, but not
> the other way around.

That's what I figured.

> As an aside - did you have a chance to try NetBSD-7 or current to see
> if the issues you saw under -6 have been fixed?

No.  I have limited bandwith/data for my internet connection, & I
started trying to install Midnight Commander with pkgsrc early Monday
monring & it took over a day to compile Perl5 & it's still working
it's way through the other dependencies.  I decided to let it go at it
to make sure the hardware was stable.  No idea how much longer this
will take....

> Again probably, but likely to be a lot of work. You might have more
> luck with xfce or one of the other "light weight" modern environments.
> For a very quick and simple window manager I quite like jwm.

I've used fvwm before, and lxde under linux.  I kinda prefer KDE3(I
run Trinity Desktop now instead of KDE4).  I was thinking about trying
to install KDE3 just to see how bad it would run.  I've run KDE3 on a
P2/400 with 96MB RAM, and it wasn't that bad.  Also, I have the Cobalt
RAQ2s, which have 250Mhz chips & 256MB RAM, so I could possibly use
one as a remote X server.  How well does running X across the network
work/or is even possible, when running different architectures?  Of
course the downside to remote X is that I want to use the Z50 for
writing on the go, so I would need to be able to runs still on it
directly.