Message: previous - next
Month: June 2012

Re: [trinity-users] is there a version of trinity that acually works

From: Andy <andy.boyle@...>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 21:58:36 -0400
On Thursday 28 June 2012 09:31:26 pm Dan Youngquist wrote:
> On 06/28/2012 06:08 PM, Calvin Morrison wrote:
> >     Lou Gogan wrote:
> >     > Is there a different installation page with instructions of how to
> >
> >     obtain a
> >
> >     > working version of trinity? Is there a working version?
> >
> > I strongly suggest Slavek's packages. I have deployed them on all of my
> > systems with  great success.
> Part of his point was that the installation instructions on the website do
> not result in a working system.  This is something we talked about here
> several months ago, and nothing has been done about it.  Repeating what I
> said then, how many people do you think have found the website, tried to
> install Trinity according to the instructions there, ended up with a
> hopelessly buggy system and a lot of time wasted, and will never try
> Trinity again?  Lou is one of a tiny minority who have come to the mailing
> list looking for help -- many, many more simply go away quietly.
> How hard would it really be to fix the website?  What would it take -- 20
> minutes?  And how many are there here who are perfectly capable of doing it
> if given access?  It would move the project from a few developers and
> die-hard dedicated groupies, to an actual viable DE that anyone can install
> and use.  I would've thought that would be a pretty high priority, but what
> do I know?

I was not really aware of this problem as I use Porteus, David Hare's Exe, or 
an older version of PCLinuxOS with KDE 3.5.10 (and Bodhi with E17).

I have to agree that this is an absolutely crazy situation and does Trinity no 
good whatsoever. I assume that the situation is as described. (It seems so 
bizarre that I feel compelled to state this disclaimer.)

+1 for fixing it.