ANNOUNCE: KDE 2.0.1 released (fwd)
*** ... continuing with the "why aren't you mirrored more" thread
*** (sorry for the break).
*** Ivan,
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2000 01:05:06 +0100 (CET)
From: Martin Konold <konold@tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de>
Reply-To: kde@kde.org
To: kde-announce@kde.org
Subject: ANNOUNCE: KDE 2.0.1 released
http://www.kde.org/announcements/announce-2.0.1.html
*** <...>
Some distributors choose to provide binary packages of KDE for certain
versions of their distribution.
*** ...that's you/Debian for Potato/Woody, ya...
Some of these binary packages for KDE
2.0.1 will be available for free download under
http://ftp.kde.org/stable/2.0.1/distribution/ or under the equivalent
directory at one of the many KDE ftp server mirrors. Please note that the
*** ...why are .debs not included in the "Some"?...
KDE team is not responsible for these packages as they are provided by
third parties -- typically, but not always, the distributor of the
relevant distribution.
*** ...sounds like they will take binaries from those they kinda trust,
*** individual or organization...
KDE 2.0.1 requires qt-2.2.1, the free version of which is available from
the above locations usually under the name qt-x11-2.2.1, although
qt-2.2.2 is recommended. KDE 2.0.1 will not work with versions of Qt
older than 2.2.1.
*** ...since Debian's KDE may also require stuff not in Debian, would
*** you need to upload all the related packages to KDE's site?...
At the time of this release, pre-compiled packages are available for:
* Linux-Mandrake 7.2
* RedHat Linux 7.0 (i386), RedHat Linux 7.0 (Alpha), RedHat Linux 7.0
(Sparc), RedHat Linux 6.x (i386), RedHat Linux 6.x (Alpha) and RedHat
Linux 6.x (Sparc)
* SuSE Linux 7.0 (i386), SuSE Linux 7.0 (Sparc) and SuSE Linux 6.4
(i386)
* Tru64 Systems
*** ...Debian should be in the above list!, something like...
* Debian GNU/Linux 2.1 (i386), Debian GNU/Linux 2.1 (powerpc), Debian
GNU/Linux 2.1 (sparc), Debian GNU/Linux "Woody" (i386), Debian
GNU/Linux "Woody" (powerpc), Debian GNU/Linux "Woody" (sparc)
*** ...or would including Woody be inappropriate?
- Bruce
Reply to: