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

Re: KDE 3.1-beta2



> The monolithic kdelibs I think is a
> problem. Particularly if you want to install a single application on a
> system that otherwise run another version of KDE, or that is not running
> KDE at all. The same breaking up into smaller parts has already been done
> with the "arts" package.

This is something I guess you'll need to talk over with calc, who does the 
kdelibs stuff.

> The xpms? I don't consciously omitted any xpms. It is not working properly
> then. The should be there.

This is just from looking at your kofffice-debian.tar.gz - the debian/ 
contains only one .xpm (take a look at CVS or the woody debs; there's an xpm 
for almost every app: kword.xpm, kspread.xpm, etc).  These xpms are installed 
in /usr/share/pixmaps and used in the debian menu entries so users of other 
window managers still get pretty icons.

Hmm, and taking a closer look the pixmaps *are* showing up in kword.files, 
kspread.files, etc - so I suspect it's actually a case that they were just 
left out of the koffice-debian.tar.gz that was uploaded.

> Otherwise I changed some package names, to have the same kind of name all
> over KDE, to avoid clashes, and for other reasons. For example, the devel
> packages on debian often does not have the so number in the package name,
> since they can't co-exist from different versions. kdelibs-dev belongs to
> kdelibs, and not to kdelibs4. The libraries in kdelibs4 does not have
> so-number 4, does not belong to KDE4, and that name can be quite
> misleading. I have made some conscious decisions of that kind.

Hmm, okay, this is something else to discuss with calc since he does 
kdelibs/kdebase.

Ben.

-- 

Ben Burton
benb@acm.org  |  bab@debian.org
Public Key: finger bab@db.debian.org

Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it
every six months.
	- Oscar Wilde




Reply to: