Re: KDE3 - Debian/experimental distribution proposal
Alan Chandler <alan@chandlerfamily.org.uk> writes:
> On Sunday 20 October 2002 6:04 pm, Brian Nelson wrote:
>
>> That's what I said. I think Qt would be the only dependency that would
>> need to be recompiled. Presumably, you could use some name-mangling
>> scheme like attaching -gcc3.2 or something to the Qt libraries and
>> package name, in lieu of a real transition plan.
>>
>> I'll have to test this today and see if it actually works.
>
> If you look at debian/control in the qt-copy code in the kde cvs - you will
> see that the groundwork for this is already done (ie there are package names
> ending in c to represent that gcc3.2 version).
Very cool. So, essentially all the work has been done to allow for
uploading gcc-3.2-compiled KDE to Debian. So what's holding it back?
Possible breakage on non-i386 arches? Wouldn't it be better to have a
KDE 3 that was broken on certain arches than no KDE 3 at all? Wouldn't
it make it easier to fix those broken arches?
--
People said I was dumb, but I proved them!
Reply to: