Re: Compiling KDE 2.2 on potato ?
On Thu, Aug 30, 2001 at 05:47:37PM +1200, David McNab wrote:
> From: Allan Sandfeld Jensen <snowwolf@one2one-networks.com>
> > I hope I can stop some of all this silly backporting thats going on.
>
> As a relative newcomer to debian, I tend to agree with the sentiments of
> those who are wanting to backport stuff to potato.
>
> For me, now I've learned my basic way around, I find potato to be the
> easiest by far to use.
> It installs nicely off the 3 CDs, and behaves itself consummately. No
> complaints whatsoever. It's Linux from Heaven. :)
>
> OTOH, woody is a bit of a pain. I found that if I do anything wrong, I
> have to reinstall, which requires a fresh download of all the base
> packages. Up to 30 mins on my 128k connection. To get around the endless
> downloading, I tried downloading and burning 2 of the 'unofficial' woody
> disks, but this turned out to be pointless, because unless I declared an
> online apt source, I couldn't install any of the tasksel collections -
> in fact, unless I declared an http/ftp apt source, tasksel would say
> that there are no tasks available.
> Worse, when I declared an http/ftp apt source, woody totally ignored
> most of the packages on the CDs and went straight to the net - I
> downloaded 1.3GB for nothing!! :(
so you want someone to backport packages which have yet to be tested even
in the unstable distro onto your stable potato box?
> More, when I try to install 3rd party debs such as Sun Java Dev Kit 1.3,
> then follow up with the obligatory 'apt-get -f install', the jdk ends up
> broken - no such problem with potato.
>
> Yet more - while potato separates these into 'X' and 'Desktop', woody's
> 'tasksel' lumps all desktop packages together - you gotta get all or
> nothing. Or, take your chances on dselect (which I find very confusing).
>
> To me, as a relative linux newcomer, potato is a work of art - simple,
> clean and robust. woody otoh is full of traps which trip up anyone
> without detailed internal knowledge of debian.
>
> I've wasted 50 hours on woody with nothing to show for my effort. But my
> server machine running potato just keeps chugging along - I can get a
> full-featured potato system up and running from scratch in less than 2
> hours - 30 mins for the basic system.
>
> According to other comments on the lists, it's going to be many months
> before woody ends up stable.
>
> So why should people have to wait that long to take advantage of KDE
> 2.2's superior performance?
because it's a pain in the ass to maintain and then deal with all the new
bugs it'll introduce because it's more than just the kde packages you have
to backport.
now...I agree with you about woody.
but let's call things the way they are. it's *testing* and not woody.
testing is this beast which at best *might* install properly if your
lucky. Until things settle down (which they are starting to do now that
the freeze stages have started) it's going to be *testing*. It won't be
woody until all the packages that are stupposed to be there are. In it's
current state it's entirely possible that (for example) the 2.2 version
of kdelibs will make it into testing weeks before any of the other 2.2 packages
will thus reaking having on KDE based apps in testing.
I for the life of me will never use testing. I will either use stable or
unstable.
ivan
--
----------------
Ivan E. Moore II
rkrusty@tdyc.com
http://snowcrash.tdyc.com
GPG KeyID=90BCE0DD
GPG Fingerprint=F2FC 69FD 0DA0 4FB8 225E 27B6 7645 8141 90BC E0DD
Reply to: