From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF1C21381F3 for ; Sun, 8 Sep 2013 10:09:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 78A05E0B6C; Sun, 8 Sep 2013 10:09:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vb0-f47.google.com (mail-vb0-f47.google.com [209.85.212.47]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F30BE0B19 for ; Sun, 8 Sep 2013 10:09:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vb0-f47.google.com with SMTP id h10so3234092vbh.34 for ; Sun, 08 Sep 2013 03:09:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=PhvkfSQvAvU3g3KmcgQjWBVsOp7Lno06ZBSXwaoSscc=; b=EWTS1jULPuL5oaGkO2DVVs0GRa5ohaJRQWYQxHlrvJpsfI+GHmRIJQdjVm/a7uwUvp NGpNtg7J79A1BRkvJqgVRqlho6HDv2qX1z5ctU/dIugF9EwI+GqykDYcqCKQ0oOpls5V dfjV3RazUWyb5+KM3G3W/xSnL1hbrWSokoMhIt4GePRWru7RrHMJpKAdigTBwaip5fgt t/wtcbPLXLxy0MI2rA9mtTU9Qw17pJUdjm8Wh1H5mWeJzDfdaFKzhEeNcxZn+pqwR6ul MSD3ylStTp/IJ3tLTLRG7JYX5z9IoJOG/1kvGs0+f510Vxjdbjo1wHqbJE8yDaBRliIs Zdzw== Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.221.64.17 with SMTP id xg17mr11804038vcb.5.1378634963643; Sun, 08 Sep 2013 03:09:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.59.8.193 with HTTP; Sun, 8 Sep 2013 03:09:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <522B40AD.1050301@marc-stuermer.de> References: <52288326.8050609@gmail.com> <522B40AD.1050301@marc-stuermer.de> Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2013 13:09:23 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Deficient Gnome Window Frames From: gevisz To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1133158e48725b04e5dc77ed X-Archives-Salt: 4eb72288-5195-405a-bcdb-fbc908e04f54 X-Archives-Hash: d41d358763bd6efb2f0e70a4dfb40eae --001a1133158e48725b04e5dc77ed Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 2013/9/7 Marc St=FCrmer > Am 06.09.2013 21:47, schrieb Paul Hartman: > > On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 2:28 PM, gevisz wrote: >> >>> But I have not found MATE in portage... >>> >> >> I see there is a mate overlay available in layman >> > > layman -a mate > Thank you for the hint. I still have to learn how to use overlays... ... because I still need an omegaT (that is absent from portage) and Skype (that is masked). Is it safe to use packages from overlays? Is there any ways to cleanly uninstall packages installed from overlays? > > GNOME 2.X is been dead since a few years. They went to develop that ugly > beast they call GNOME 3. > > MATE is the proven and working fork of GNOME 2.X. If you want GNOME 2.X, > then you should take a look at it indeed. > > > --001a1133158e48725b04e5dc77ed Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
2013= /9/7 Marc St=FCrmer <mail@marc-stuermer.de>
Am 06.09.2013 21:47, schrieb Paul Hartman:

On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 2:28 PM, gevisz <gevisz@gmail.com> wrote:
But I have not found MATE in portage...

I see there is a mate overlay available in layman

layman -a mate

Thank you for the hint.<= br>
I still have to learn how to use overlays...

... because I still need an omegaT (that is absent from portage)
=A0 =A0 and Skype (that is masked).

Is it safe to use packages from overlays?

Is there any w= ays to cleanly uninstall packages installed from overlays?
= =A0

GNOME 2.X is been dead since a few years. They went to develop that ugly be= ast they call GNOME 3.

MATE is the proven and working fork of GNOME 2.X. If you want GNOME 2.X, th= en you should take a look at it indeed.



--001a1133158e48725b04e5dc77ed--