[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: KDE filesystem structure



On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 03:31:07PM +0200, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 January 2002 13:29, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > > Note that *everybody* except debian uses /opt/kde3, and changing to that
> > > would be beneficial. The current layout has to be changed in any case, it
> > > is major brain damage.
> >
> > Changing the way Debian has packaged stuff for KDE3 and surprising the
> > hell out of everyone is an astoundingly bad move. Don't do it.
> >
> > Why is Debian majorly brain-damaged in this regard? Policy of least
> > surprise, because I think you'll find quite a few people surprised when
> > we RANDOMLY CHANGE LOCATIONS ON A WHIM.
> 
> Well the directory layout simply doesn't make sense. It's possible to be both 
> policy compliant and obey KDE conventions. Using /usr/lib/kde3 as KDE root 
> mainly. See my other mail to see how it would be done. This would remove a 
> lot of cruft from debian packaging scripts as well so it really is a good 
> thing.

There are *very*, *VERY*, few times when I'm inclined to quote Jared
Johnson (solomon), but this is one of them:

bzzzzzt bzzzzzzzzzzzt!  hear that it is the big buzzer that means you
are wrong wrong wrong!  still going off AAAAA BZZZZZZZZZT IT IS GETTING
LOUD AND LOUDER SIGNIFYING THE PROFOUND WRONGNESS OF YOU
BUAAAAAAAAAAR!!!

Using that as the KDE root is just SILLY BAD WRONG EVIL.

Do you also advocate having the apache root in /usr/lib/apache? After a
while it starts to defeat the whole point of /usr/bin. What next? A
Debconf note saying that you have to have "export
PATH=$PATH:/usr/lib/kde3/bin" in your ~/.<whatever> to be able to run
startkde?

> Add that the fact that KDE3 is not even properly packaged now: there is room 
> for improvement on that front. I'd though like to hear Chris's opinion first 
> as he is the person dealing with these issues. I'm still "prohibitively" busy 
> to engage in any hacking activity :/

KDE3 will be properly packaged the moment it can be installed
side-by-side with KDE2.2 using *standard* *Debian* *layouts*. Let policy
dictate what we do, not lines of crack.

> Otherwise, only packagers and programmers care about KDE locations. The above 
> change would make both happier.

Not to forget your average punter who doesn't want to type
/usr/lib/kde3/bin/startkde, every time.

>   1) Packagers can have very trivial build scripts, I can even provide a 
> Makefile to be included in admin/ dir. (And remove that redundant perl script 
> that dumps a text file BTW)
>   2) Programmers can easily test their applications on a debian system by 
> compiling to prefix /usr/lib/kde3.

Daniel's Amazing Fantastic Fabulous Mind-Rocking Guide To Building A KDE
App On Debian:
./configure --prefix=/usr
make
su -c 'make install'

> These are benefits not to be ignored. I say we go ahead and do a major 
> cleanup, it's not that difficult btw we are just going to change a few 
> makefiles that's all, and write a small text file telling people how they 
> should make debian KDE3 packages. I think an example kde-hello package might 
> make sense.

I register my vote of disgust. It IS difficult, in fact, because it
means we fuck around with how Debian has done things since well before
the Dark Ages. When you ask people what the best thing about Debian is,
they respond "policy" (in general; some say dpkg/apt). So what are we
doing? Random crap, I hear you say?

Don't.

Please.

-- 
Daniel Stone						    <daniel@sfarc.net>
* Culus fears perl - the language with optional errors

Attachment: pgpuFdpGLRgnX.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: