1 |
2008/5/30 Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>: |
2 |
|
3 |
> Beso <givemesugarr@×××××.com> posted |
4 |
> d257c3560805300619v2631c50exe0dfa95ea11e2c34@××××××××××.com, excerpted |
5 |
> below, on Fri, 30 May 2008 13:19:08 +0000: |
6 |
> |
7 |
> > you unistall it and install the new slot. the kde 4.1 should have the |
8 |
> > kde4 slot while the kde4.1 beta has the kde4-live slot. you can clearly |
9 |
> > see that they're different slots and that removing one doesn't prevent |
10 |
> > you from using the other. anyway, in my opinion that overlay will die |
11 |
> > after the kde4.1 will hit portage or soon after that. |
12 |
> |
13 |
> Do the KDE-live builds require paludis? I recall reading that they were |
14 |
> headed that way, because it could support an EAPI with needed features |
15 |
> while portage couldn't yet. Those builds were live only and were to stay |
16 |
> in the overlay since packages in the main tree must support portage. It |
17 |
> was the non-live snapshot versions that were the portage ebuilds, to |
18 |
> eventually be targeted at the tree, after they became release ebuilds, of |
19 |
> course. |
20 |
> |
21 |
|
22 |
the kde svn overlay yes, but from what i've read there's a new overlay which |
23 |
includes the 4.0.80 version (the 4.1 beta) which is usable with portage. the |
24 |
other overlay is the real development trunk so there quite a huge movement |
25 |
in it. also it doesn't really make sense to use binpkg for a svn or git |
26 |
ebuild that continues to change. it would mean a real huge amount of hd |
27 |
space. this tree instead is the official 4.1 branch and should have some |
28 |
sort of borders in which development would stay. |
29 |
|
30 |
|
31 |
> I've not done paludis due to its lack of binary package support. Even |
32 |
> tho I'm running only a single computer, I use binary packages for |
33 |
> installation backups and handy lookup reference since I can just dig in |
34 |
> the appropriate package tarball to see what an old version of a file |
35 |
> looked like, so lack of binary package support is as far as I'm concerned |
36 |
> a blocker, here. But I guess it hasn't been a priority (sort of like |
37 |
> proxy support in KDE4, from what I read). <shrug> If it works for |
38 |
> them... but it's not going to work for me without it. |
39 |
> |
40 |
|
41 |
proxy support is working very well in kde4 (i'm actually using it without |
42 |
any issues). the problem is konqueror that isn't much compatible with sites |
43 |
designed for firefox and it isn't yet able to play well with flash. the |
44 |
binpkg in paludis isn't present as far as i know. |
45 |
|
46 |
|
47 |
-- |
48 |
dott. ing. beso |