Re: backports of latest kde to stable 3.1?
I'm curious as to the advantages of running a backported version to haveing a
mixed system with KDE at Sid level. Is there any technical reason not to use
a mixed system?
On Tuesday 13 September 2005 13:17, Patrick Dreker wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 13. September 2005 12.23 schrieb Adeodato Simó:
> > * Patrick Dreker [Tue, 13 Sep 2005 12:05:48 +0200]:
> > Oh, it's nice to have people backport latest sid KDE to the previous
> > stable release. :)
> > In order to avoid duplicating work, I want to point you to the work of
> > Tapio Kautto (see ) as part of the formerly-known-as-kalyxo project.
> > I recommend that, if you have some time you'd be willing to spend on
> > working on backports (that'd rock), you contact him and offer your
> > help.
> >  http://lists.kde.org/?l=kalyxo-devel&m=112617950500691&w=2
> Thanks for the hint. Even though the same server, which now hosts my KDE
> 3.4.2 backport, is the primary FTP server for ekhis.org (the project
> formerly known as kalyxo), this somehow went past me. %-)
> I will contact Tapio... As I need the backports for internal purposes
> anyways, I could very well coordinate my work with ekhis.org to get "clean"
> backports with some support even...
> > > Please note, that these KDE packages require updated dbus packages,
> > > which are also provided in the repository. Due to changes in naming
> > > there may be dependency conflicts with these packages and packages
> > > depending on dbus which are not part of this repository. Any hints,
> > > reports or help is appreciated.
> > Well, all of this is handled correctly in Tapio's backports, so
> > perhaps it's wiser for people to wait that these are officially
> > announced. YMMV.
> OK, This really seems to be wiser, except, if you really, really wants to
> upgrade now, and don't mind having to sort it all out manually later. I
> will leave the packages up for reference and for those wanting to test