Re: [xmonad] Re: A New Solution to Removing the GHC Dependency

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 06:49:54AM -0500, brian wrote:

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 4:31 AM, Miernik wrote:

...

This is perfectly true. Someone here said that "124 MB is not a lot, are you sure its a problem?". Well, it bloody is, its just killing the idea of using a light window manager. [...]

XMonad is light in terms of lines of source and errors per line. If you're in some kind of disk space crisis that nobody else in the world knows anything about, you can definitely get some WM that takes fewer bytes on disk. But maybe just think for a minute about whether that would make any sense.

You should be aware that there's more than only big fat i386 and amd64 (or x86_64 or what it's called on Linux) with hundreds of GB of disk space. For example, there's the Zaurus C3000, with impressive 4 GB disk space. Well, I'm a snob, I own a C3200 with 6 GB, and once GHC is ported to arm, which may happen within the next 6 to 12 months, I'll of course install it on my Zaurus, but other users may just want to run XMonad, without having to depend on a full GHC installation. And there are some similarly limited toys in the wild that are much less exotic than a Zaurus running OpenBSD (think of the Eee PC). For now, people who want to use XMonad on such gear have to either stick to the default configuration or to install GHC. Ciao, Kili