1 |
On 23 February 2010 17:27, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote: |
2 |
> Andrew John Hughes posted on Mon, 22 Feb 2010 11:58:46 +0000 as excerpted: |
3 |
> |
4 |
>> I've managed to rebuild most of KDE 3.5 against the new jpeg-8 library |
5 |
>> using the overlay. Many thanks for maintaining it! |
6 |
>> |
7 |
>> I think the removal from the main tree is premature. Not only is KDE 4 |
8 |
>> still an unstable resource hog, but the KOffice developers explicitly |
9 |
>> state that 2.1: |
10 |
>> |
11 |
>> 'is not aimed at end users, and we do not recommend Linux distributions |
12 |
>> to package it as the default office suite yet.' |
13 |
>> |
14 |
>> http://www.koffice.org/news/koffice-2-1-released/ |
15 |
>> |
16 |
>> Whoever removed it from the main tree has completely ignored this and |
17 |
>> decided to ship an incomplete office suite to users for the own |
18 |
>> convenience. |
19 |
> |
20 |
> FWIW, I agree that it's premature, but it's not Gentoo's problem so much |
21 |
> as KDE's and Qt Software's, as both kde3 and qt3 are unsupported upstream, |
22 |
> thus, subject to security vulns, getting increasingly difficult to |
23 |
> maintain in the face of continuing system updates, etc. Why KDE refuses |
24 |
> to support the previous stable version until the new version is generally |
25 |
> stable as well, I don't know, but they don't. (Qt I can see a bit more, |
26 |
> as they're a commercial company, now part of Nokia, and supporting older |
27 |
> versions costs real money. It wasn't their fault that kde decided to go |
28 |
> for a full rewrite instead of a straight upgrade port, /then/ do the |
29 |
> rewrite when they have an existing stable kde based on a qt that's going |
30 |
> to be supported for awhile.) |
31 |
> |
32 |
|
33 |
You're right that KDE's attitude is even worse - the choice of version |
34 |
numbering being only the start. I just don't think the Gentoo |
35 |
position helps things, especially when the opposite tact could be |
36 |
taken; provide KDE4 in an overlay for those who want to try it and |
37 |
maintain KDE 3 in the main tree. After all, they wouldn't be alone as |
38 |
Debian is also maintaining it in stable. Instead, we are faced with a |
39 |
blanket mask out of the blue and the 'upgrade -- it's so much better' |
40 |
fallacy. |
41 |
|
42 |
I also approach this not so much for myself (I only use the odd KDE |
43 |
app and not the desktop environment itself; I find even 3.5 too |
44 |
bloated) but for other less tech-savvy users who just want to go about |
45 |
their day-to-day tasks on the computer. For them, everything works |
46 |
fine wtih 3.5. Why do they need to change? It gets worse when you |
47 |
then install a few KDE 4 apps and see sporadic crashes and heavy CPU |
48 |
utilisation. I used to find khexedit a useful tool for debugging data |
49 |
files when coding. In 4, there is a complete rewrite called okteta |
50 |
with no apparent additional functionality but which uses 100% CPU as |
51 |
soon as it loads up and is basically unusable. And that's with 4.4 on |
52 |
x86_64! |
53 |
|
54 |
I don't really put Qt in the same boat. Qt4 has been around for quite |
55 |
a while longer than the equivalent KDE release (because of this huge |
56 |
rewrite they decided to do) and I'd be happy to ditch it for the |
57 |
superior 4 release if it wasn't for the loss of all those usable KDE |
58 |
applications. If you compare the switch from Gtk+1 to Gtk+2, it was |
59 |
also painful but developers tended to do the minimum required to get |
60 |
their code building (making use of the deprecated symbols still |
61 |
available) rather than throw it all away and do a complete rewrite. I |
62 |
don't remember anything like this KDE upgrade with GNOME. |
63 |
|
64 |
> FWIW, I've been quite pleased with kde 4.4. The upgrade from 3.x is still |
65 |
> likely to be a big nightmare for many, as so many things have changed and |
66 |
> there's some areas that other non-kde-core solutions will have to be used |
67 |
> instead, but that's to be expected with an upgrade of that size. I had |
68 |
> predicted with early 4.3 that based on evident rate of progress, 4.3 was |
69 |
> the first one I could in good conscience call late beta quality, and 4.4 |
70 |
> should be rc quality with 4.5 hopefully finally reaching release quality. |
71 |
> 4.4 has certainly met at least that prediction, here, and to my very |
72 |
> pleasant surprise, exceeded it to the point where I'm very nearly ready to |
73 |
> call it full release quality, the only things keeping me from doing so is |
74 |
> that I don't have all of kde installed, and haven't tested in 4.4 all of |
75 |
> what I do have installed, and the caution from having been burned so many |
76 |
> times previously by kde4. But kde's official position was that 4.2 was |
77 |
> ready for normal users, and that was terribly sad, because all it did was |
78 |
> demonstrate how terribly out of touch with reality they were. |
79 |
|
80 |
I haven't used it as an environment much. I've seen it running on a |
81 |
Debian testing box and to me, it just seems much the same with lots |
82 |
more flashy gimmicks that slow the machine down. Of most |
83 |
disappointment is the decision to copy Windows with the K button, a |
84 |
change I immediately reverted. |
85 |
|
86 |
The applications are a mixed bunch. Some are close to being Qt4 ports |
87 |
of the originals with some improvements. Others are just a joke. |
88 |
|
89 |
> |
90 |
> Well, there's still one bug that could be a show-stopper. konqueror (and |
91 |
> all of KDE) SSL and certificate support and management isn't yet up to |
92 |
> what I'd call normal usable standards (it works in general, but the cert |
93 |
> management familiar to kde3 users is missing, with the result being that |
94 |
> it's broken on some sites with more exotic certificates -- good SSL and |
95 |
> certificate management is absolutely critical in this day and age when |
96 |
> many banking transactions and purchases are via web browser!). But |
97 |
> realistically, konqueror as a web browser is falling behind and looking to |
98 |
> be replaced by the webkit based rekonq browser after it matures a bit |
99 |
> more, enough so that few people use konqueror as their main browser any |
100 |
> more anyway, with chrome/chromium and firefox/iceweasel/icecat being the |
101 |
> major browsers picking up from konqueror, so this isn't the blocker it |
102 |
> could have been as there's honestly not that many people, even among kde |
103 |
> devs I gather, using konqueror as their primary browser anyway. But that |
104 |
> same support is used in a few other areas in kde as well, and it continues |
105 |
> to be problematic there. |
106 |
> |
107 |
|
108 |
Yeah I wouldn't recommend Konqueror to anyone. It had little use with |
109 |
3.5 because it was unusable with so many sites, so I haven't even |
110 |
really tried the KDE 4 version. khtml has succeeded in being the |
111 |
basis for WebKit, so they may as well just use that directly rather |
112 |
than trying to continue developing a separate browser. Qt even |
113 |
includes a webkit binding and I assume they are using that to some |
114 |
extent. At least, building 4.4 required it. |
115 |
|
116 |
> Then of course as you mentioned, there's koffice. Just as it's really not |
117 |
> qt's fault that kde took so long to stabilize on a reasonably current |
118 |
> version, it's not so much kde-core's fault that koffice isn't yet properly |
119 |
> stable on kde4. |
120 |
> |
121 |
|
122 |
koffice is the main issue with the one of the other users I mentioned |
123 |
earlier. She uses kword just fine with 1.6.3. There's no particular |
124 |
reason to try and use 2.2, and the website explicitly puts you off the |
125 |
idea. If only they'd made that more clear by calling it 2.0 beta or |
126 |
something. Gentoo seem to have taken the availability of some version |
127 |
of KOffice that builds against Qt4 as a reason to dump the old |
128 |
versions. It seems to me that they don't actually use said |
129 |
applications and just want a reason to get rid of the old |
130 |
dependencies. |
131 |
|
132 |
> The same applies to other apps built on kde, such as k3b, possibly amarok |
133 |
> (which was bad enough, especially for amd64 users, that I got fed up and |
134 |
> switched to something else, thus the "possibly" as I don't know current |
135 |
> status), kaffeine, etc. But the k3b live version (ebuild available in the |
136 |
> kde overlay) is actually quite good, as I mentioned I gave up on amarok as |
137 |
> it never was a real good fit for me, and I found the very good qt4 based |
138 |
> smplayer to replace kaffeine, so the status on those isn't too bad. But |
139 |
> koffice... that remains a legitimate blocker, for those dependent on it |
140 |
> for their workflow. |
141 |
> |
142 |
|
143 |
The new amarok was the first part of KDE 4 I tried, and probably still |
144 |
takes the crown as the worst. They seem to have dumped everything |
145 |
good about it, including MusicBrainz support. Strangely enough, users |
146 |
aren't that excited by knowing an application builds against Qt4 -- |
147 |
that's pretty meaningless. What they generally want is something that |
148 |
works and a few new features are a bonus. |
149 |
|
150 |
> -- |
151 |
> Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
152 |
> "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
153 |
> and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
154 |
> |
155 |
> |
156 |
> |
157 |
|
158 |
Thanks again for maintaining the overlay, |
159 |
-- |
160 |
Andrew :-) |
161 |
|
162 |
Free Java Software Engineer |
163 |
Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) |
164 |
|
165 |
Support Free Java! |
166 |
Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK |
167 |
http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath |
168 |
http://openjdk.java.net |
169 |
|
170 |
PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (http://subkeys.pgp.net) |
171 |
Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA 7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8 |