| 1 |
Marcus D. Hanwell wrote: |
| 2 |
> Dale wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Philip Webb wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> 080907 Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: |
| 5 |
>>> |
| 6 |
>>>> ignoring FHS ... are not valid solutions to this problem. |
| 7 |
>>>> |
| 8 |
>>> |
| 9 |
>>> Why ? Who is demanding FHS compliance & for what reasons ? |
| 10 |
>>> Gentoo is not like other distros & sometimes needs to find its own way. |
| 11 |
>>> Given the well-known problems with KDE 4.0 & (still) 4.1 , |
| 12 |
>>> I'ld like to be able to have the option of multiple versions available. |
| 13 |
>>> |
| 14 |
>>> I really do appreciate the hard volunteer work the KDE team donates |
| 15 |
>>> & have nothing but thanks to them all, but shouldn't your priority be |
| 16 |
>>> to get KDE 4.1 into 'testing', so that users can actually try it out ? |
| 17 |
>>> There's also 3.5.10 , which has been released, but isn't in Gentoo yet. |
| 18 |
>>> |
| 19 |
>> As a lowly user, I would like to keep KDE 3.5.* for quite a while and |
| 20 |
>> will most likely not switch until at least 4.3 or better is out. |
| 21 |
>> Even that mostly depends on how many "issues" are still left out there. |
| 22 |
> The slotting of KDE 3.* and KDE 4.* was never a question - these will |
| 23 |
> always remain slottable. The question is whether we really need to |
| 24 |
> keep slotting of minor KDE versions in the new 4.* line, i.e. KDE 4.1 |
| 25 |
> and 4.2 slotted on the same system. I think the benefits of an FHS |
| 26 |
> compliant, non-slottable (with other KDE 4 minor versions) install is |
| 27 |
> the best thing for our general user base. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> I also see how we can have slots outside of FHS for developers, power |
| 30 |
> users and the ones who just like to be different ;-) These can be |
| 31 |
> maintained in an overlay and use different slots than the ebuilds in |
| 32 |
> the main tree. It is no real issue to be able to run a slotted KDE 4.2 |
| 33 |
> install alongside an FHS install of KDE 4.* and so FHS installs can be |
| 34 |
> successfully slotted with other kdeprefix installs too. |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> This helps to make the normal KDE install much simpler to maintain |
| 37 |
> with less gradual build up of cruft over the years (multiple older |
| 38 |
> slots the user is no longer using). It also brings us into line with |
| 39 |
> the FHS compliant Qt 4 ebuilds and other desktops such as Gnome. The |
| 40 |
> purpose of these posts was to solicit further feedback before things |
| 41 |
> are pushed to the main tree. |
| 42 |
> |
| 43 |
> Most other distributions install KDE into the main /usr hierarchy, |
| 44 |
> that is the way upstream intends KDE to be installed and I think it |
| 45 |
> will work well for most users. I do think Gentoo is about choice and |
| 46 |
> so having overlays with ebuilds in a different slot seems to be the |
| 47 |
> best solution we can offer given the constraint of slot invariance. |
| 48 |
> |
| 49 |
> Thanks, |
| 50 |
> |
| 51 |
> Marcus |
| 52 |
> |
| 53 |
> |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
To try to make my point clearer, if I can set a USE flag or some other |
| 56 |
config so that I can have both KDE 3.* and KDE 4.* installed at the same |
| 57 |
time and select which one to login into, I'm cool. That option doesn't |
| 58 |
have to be available forever but long enough for KDE to get some of the |
| 59 |
"kinks" worked out. I'm talking maybe 6 months to a year which will |
| 60 |
vary depending on the speed KDE gets things worked out and |
| 61 |
fixed?implemented. |
| 62 |
|
| 63 |
I'm not hard to please by any means but I do like changes to not be a |
| 64 |
overnight thing. I'm to old for things to "soak in" in a rush. |
| 65 |
|
| 66 |
Thanks |
| 67 |
|
| 68 |
Dale |
| 69 |
|
| 70 |
:-) |
Archives