| 1 |
On Sunday 19 September 2004 23:26, Joshua J. Berry wrote: |
| 2 |
> I could easily see KDE/Qt being treated as an "add-on", given that (a) |
| 3 |
> they're not necessary for core system functionality (whatever that means), |
| 4 |
Er, so does that mean anything not in the system profile should go in /opt? |
| 5 |
I'd say qt/kde is as important a piece of a dekstop system using it as any |
| 6 |
other. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> and (b) they are both heavily-bloated, |
| 9 |
Bloated in what respect? Size, speed? And what does it have to do with where |
| 10 |
we install them to? |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> and you probably don't want to |
| 13 |
> pollute /usr... |
| 14 |
It's true that I don't want to, only I don't see a better solution. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
If there's a general consensus on moving to /opt I can live with that, because |
| 17 |
it doesn't affect the ebuilds/eclasses/results one bit. It's just that it's |
| 18 |
entirely inconsistent with the way we're using /opt right now. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
And what if, in a year from now, twenty other projects will decide it's good |
| 21 |
for the users to allow many versions to be installed side by side? Will we |
| 22 |
move everything to /opt? My point here is that kde itself is not special in |
| 23 |
any way (although qt arguably is, since you do want different qt2 and qt3 |
| 24 |
programs side by side, but then the qt libraries could live together in /usr |
| 25 |
with some effort). It's just that kde users asked for this functionality a |
| 26 |
lot, so I added it. Apart from running two stable trees, kde developers use |
| 27 |
this to run a stable tree and cvs HEAD. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
<snip> |
| 30 |
> I really do think this is what /opt was intended for. "Add-on" sounds to |
| 31 |
> me like it's one of those purposefully open-ended words that you can |
| 32 |
> interpret however you like. Actually, the whole section on /opt in the FHS |
| 33 |
> reads that way ... |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Well, I simply don't know what they mean by add-on, so obviously you can |
| 36 |
interpret it however you like :-) |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
However, isn't there -any- consensus on what this is supposed to mean? Can we |
| 39 |
just ask the FHS guys if this is so unclear? (And cf. what Ciaran just |
| 40 |
replied.) |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
-- |
| 43 |
Dan Armak |
| 44 |
Gentoo Linux developer (KDE) |
| 45 |
Matan, Israel |
| 46 |
Public GPG key: http://dev.gentoo.org/~danarmak/danarmak-gpg-public.key |
| 47 |
Fingerprint: DD70 DBF9 E3D4 6CB9 2FDD 0069 508D 9143 8D5F 8951 |
Archives