Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Malte S. Stretz" <msquadrat.nospamplease@×××.net>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] any interest in removing /usr/qt and /usr/kde ?
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 17:19:29
Message-Id: 200409201919.23392@malte.stretz.eu.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] any interest in removing /usr/qt and /usr/kde ? by Dan Armak
1 On Monday 20 September 2004 18:44 CET Dan Armak wrote:
2 > On Monday 20 September 2004 19:36, Malte S. Stretz wrote:
3 > > That's actually a good point. Theoretically its possible to share some
4 > > parts of the system across several machines, which is of course
5 > > complicated by a /foo/kde/x.y/share directory structure. So most
6 > > probably your suggestion is the best till now (and also one of the
7 > > alternatives which was discussed for KDE 4). A directory
8 > > /usr/bin/kde/x.y feels weird on the first glance, but why not?
9 >
10 > I don't understand this point. Could you please elaborate? Why is
11 > /usr/bin/kde better than either /usr/kde or /usr/packages/kde? Do you
12 > mean that kde should be split between
13 > /usr/{bin,lib,share,include,...}/kde/<version> dirs?
14
15 Yes. The reason is that this would make KDE follow the rationale behind the
16 FHS most: Stuff in share can generally be shared (eg. NFS-mounted) across
17 several machines, while lib continas platform-specific stuff and bin... you
18 get the point. This might happen rarely but it's the intention behind the
19 split done in the FHS.
20
21 I don't know what you mean with docs which don't belong below lib in your
22 other mail, was it a misunderstanding of Carsten's mail?
23
24 > Specifying such separate dirs rather than a unified KDEDIR/KDEDIRS looks,
25 > at first sight, to be a major PITA. Maybe they'll improve support for
26 > this in kde4, but I don't relish the thought of doing it with 3.x. Unless
27 > there's a way already to specify such separated dirs via env variables a
28 > la KDEDIRS that I'm not aware of?
29
30 I didn't say that this is already possible without much headache, just that
31 it's maybe the best/cleanest solution for some distant future.
32
33 But actually, even currently I don't see a problem with that; the configure
34 line would become rather long ('./configure --bindir=/usr/bin/kde/3.3
35 --datadir=/usr/share/kde/3.3 ...') but at least there it would work. And
36 those dirs are available via eg. 'kde-config --path data' later on.
37
38 But I don't know how many stuff inside KDE or how many third-party tools
39 depend on a "flat" $KDEDIR available via the environment variable(s) so
40 this might indeed be stuff for KDE 4.
41
42 OTOH is it not like the current approach with /usr/kde eats your children or
43 burns your box. It's just not nice and FHS compliant and stuff but has
44 been there for quite some time now and could stay as it is for another year
45 or so until KDE 4 is released. IMHO.
46
47 Btw, all this discussion was about KDE, I wonder how GNOME handles this
48 stuff. Does it also use /usr/gnome/x.y or so something else?
49
50 Cheers,
51 Malte
52
53 --
54 [SGT] Simon G. Tatham: "How to Report Bugs Effectively"
55 <http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html>
56 [ESR] Eric S. Raymond: "How To Ask Questions The Smart Way"
57 <http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html>
58
59 --
60 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies