Hello,
On sekmadienis 09 Gegužė 2010 12:54:38 Alejandro Exojo wrote:
> * However, I do think that it might be convenient to have around some 3.5
> applications side by side with the 4.x ones for a while, the same way that
> one might have non-KDE applications.
Squeeze will ship with a couple of KDE 3 applications. Qt 3 and kdelibs (KDE
3) are there to stay for Squeeze.
> That said, I would like to ask some questions about how feasible would be
> to tweak at least some of the KDE 3.5 packaging to not clash with official
> 4.4 packages. Ana mentioned this possibility, and I think I can give it a
> chance.
All compatibility with KDE 3 (as a desktop) packaging has been dropped long
ago in KDE 4 packages. And it is not coming back. So basically you will have
do major changes to existing KDE 3.5 packaging in order to bring it back as
installlable packages. Or maybe it would be easier to start from scratch...
> First, if I understood correctly, Qt3 and kdelibs 3.5 will still be around
> for some time. Am I right? I still see them on unstable, and I suppose
> they will be on the archive unless all remaining KDE 3 packages are
> removed.
Squeeze will release with both. But all remaining KDE 3 software will be
forcefully dropped from archive for Squeeze+1 at some point. Hopefully, there
won't have been many of them left by then.
> Second, I know that compiling KDE 3.5 setting /opt as a prefix is not an
> option for official packages, but is it a good idea for private packages?
> I'm used to compile development versions in a different prefix, and is
> quite easy and safe, but I have to do manual setup each time I want to run
> them.
Different prefix is less PITA definitely.
> And what about adding a suffix to the 3.5 applications? I suppose this will
> be more work, but also feels like the proper way to do it.
In my opinion, you will end up in packaging nightmare then. Ubuntu ended up in
the same nightmare packaging KDE 4 alongside KDE 3 back in the KDE 4.{01}
days.
> Finally, how realistic do you think is all of this? I don't have the skills
> (nor the time to acquire them) to even think about "infrastructure" stuff
> (desktop, kdm, libraries), but I have some rusty knowledge of packaging KDE
> applications, and luckily for me, it's just 2 or 3 of the old ones that I
> need.
I don't think this is realistic at all for quality stuff. In particular, I
don't think it is worth your or anybody else effort. Just try helping to
properly maintain kdelibs (kde3) source package in sid (not to mention full
suite in lenny) and you will see what I mean. This job will get very boring
very soon.
> PS: I can move the conversation to pkg-kde-talk if you want. I'm subscribed
> there too.
Nop, there is no need to. Current KDE packaging team clearly expressed that we
are not going to endorse or support any "bring back KDE 3.5 efforts", we just
won't stop anybody if he/she/they end up riding that roller coaster. It is not
going to be fun.
--
Modestas Vainius <modestas@vainius.eu>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.