1 |
Your mua or some gateway has inserted really ugly linebreaks in the text you |
2 |
quoted. I tried to make it prettier. |
3 |
|
4 |
On Thursday 20 October 2005 21:17, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
5 |
> I'm not aware of any. The only similar thing I'm aware of is a few |
6 |
> incredibly broken packages that require Xvfb at build time. |
7 |
> |
8 |
> If there are packages that need to run any X server at build time, |
9 |
> they're even more broken. |
10 |
Agreed. |
11 |
|
12 |
> | Firstly, as I said in my other replies, this would change the current |
13 |
> | meaning of the X USE flag. The original meaning would stay without a flag. |
14 |
> | Today it means 'enable support for clienside X11'. You want to make it |
15 |
> | mean 'install X11 server'. If I'm building a headless box without an X11 |
16 |
> | server, but I do want to emerge KDE and run it over ssh -Y from another |
17 |
> | box, I need two useflags to specify this. But even if we introduce a new |
18 |
> | USE flag 'Xserver', on by default where X is on by default, and used as |
19 |
> | you describe above, the problems I describe below will remain. |
20 |
> Does it really mean that? How about all of the X USE flags in font |
21 |
> ebuilds? They mean basically what I'm saying. |
22 |
Until today we've only had a single xorg-x11 ebuild. So all the ebuilds today |
23 |
have DEPEND="X? (virtual/x11 )", which includes an X server. But they only |
24 |
really need the clientside libs+headers and so (I argued) what they /really/ |
25 |
mean is 'enable support for clientside X', because the presence of the server |
26 |
doesn't affect them in any way. |
27 |
|
28 |
But forget about what the flag is supposed to mean today. How can my scenario |
29 |
above be resolved without using two useflags? |
30 |
|
31 |
> | Secondly, there can be more than one X11 server (kdrive, etc). |
32 |
> | Depending on xorg-server is bad. If anything, we should introduce a |
33 |
> | virtual/x11-server. |
34 |
I'm just explicitly noting that you didn't comment on this. |
35 |
|
36 |
> | Thirdly, it's a 'convenience dep': whether xorg-server is installed or |
37 |
> | not won't affect the behavior of KDE in any way (given a working DISPLAY |
38 |
> | setting). |
39 |
> |
40 |
> Right, the intent is to basically say "I'm part of the 90% of users who |
41 |
> has X installed locally and wants things to just work." |
42 |
They will just work if they just 'emerge xorg-server'. Just as they need to |
43 |
manually 'emerge KDE' and probably 'emerge openoffice' and mplayer and |
44 |
mozilla and lots of other things. They have to do all this when installing a |
45 |
new system anyway, so my opinion is that adding an extra manual emerge |
46 |
instruction to the handbook isn't any more bother to them and makes things a |
47 |
lot easier for us. |
48 |
|
49 |
Gentoo has a tradition of minimalism in the system package list and so on. |
50 |
It's against the usual and correct Gentoo behavior, IMHO, to install (big!) |
51 |
stuff by default just because 90% of the users want it. A desktop sub-profile |
52 |
or meta-ebuild would be a better tool for this. |
53 |
|
54 |
> |>We will still install some fonts, but not all, and I'll note that in the |
55 |
> |>metabuilds text. |
56 |
> | |
57 |
> | Which ones? Selected how? I'm asking because I don't want to work too |
58 |
> | hard on deciding which fonts KDE should depend on :-) |
59 |
> |
60 |
> Selected arbitrarily by the x11 team based on requirement, common use |
61 |
> and prettiness factor. Probably font-misc-misc, font-bh-ttf, |
62 |
> font-adobe-utopia-type1 and maybe some others that are brought to my |
63 |
> attention. |
64 |
Which other new font ebuilds were included in the monolithic xorg-x11 ebuild? |
65 |
media-fonts/font-*? |
66 |
|
67 |
-- |
68 |
Dan Armak |
69 |
Gentoo Linux developer (KDE) |
70 |
Public GPG key: http://dev.gentoo.org/~danarmak/danarmak-gpg-public.key |
71 |
Fingerprint: DD70 DBF9 E3D4 6CB9 2FDD 0069 508D 9143 8D5F 8951 |