Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship

Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-ppc-user
Lists: gentoo-ppc-user: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
To: gentooppc-user@g.o
From: "Calum Selkirk" <cselkirk@...>
Subject: Fwd: [gentoo-user] RFC: KDE 'child' packages (separate ebuilds for konqueror kmail etc.)
Date: Mon May 13 07:51:10 2002
----- Forwarded message from Dan Armak <danarmak@g.o> -----

> Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 13:01:44 +0300
> From: Dan Armak <danarmak@g.o>
> Reply-To: gentoo-user@g.o
> To: gentoo-dev@g.o, gentoo-user@g.o
> Subject: [gentoo-user] RFC: KDE 'child' packages (separate ebuilds for konqueror kmail etc.)
> X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.4]

> Hello everyone,
> During the last week I've been working on separating the kde-base/* packages 
> into 'child' packages, a feature requested by some people.  For example, 
> instead of kdenetwork we'd have separate kmail, knode, kppp etc. ebuilds. The 
> actual eclass framework to do this is ready.
> However, there is a problem. A 'parent' package (e.g. kde-base/kdenetwork) 
> will still exist since most people will want to merge all of it. There are 
> two ways to go:
> 1. The parent and child packages will not be related. They will overwrite each 
> other's files. This is unacceptable.
> 2. The parent package will depend on all of its children and install nothing 
> itself. Like kde-base/kde depends on kdebase kdenetwork etc., so will 
> kde-base/kdenetwork depend on net-www/konqueror, net-mail/kmail etc. This is 
> the approach I've taken so far.
> The problem is that while every 'child' package only compiles and installs the 
> relevant files, it still needs to run the complete configure script of its 
> parent package. In the admittedly worst-case example of kdebase, the script 
> takes ~1.5 minutes to execute on my P3-900. kdebase has 39 child packages, so 
> emerging kdebase with the new setup (i.e. emerging all child packages) will 
> take about an hour longer than emerging a monolithic kdebase takes now - 
> worse for slower computers.
> Most users won't accept this tradeoff of compile time for flexibility. So if 
> you have an alternative solution, please suggest it. Otherwise there won't be 
> any kde child packages. Speak now or remain forever silent :-)

Lists: gentoo-ppc-user: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
<no subject>
Next by thread:
Fwd: Re: [gentoo-user] RFC: KDE 'child' packages - new direction
Previous by date:
Re: mpg123
Next by date:
Fwd: Re: [gentoo-user] RFC: KDE 'child' packages - new direction

Updated Jun 17, 2009

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-ppc-user mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.