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

Re: BUG: libkdeprint_management.la missing in kdelibs4

Hash: SHA1

On Mittwoch, 5. Februar 2003 09:59, Brian Nelson wrote:
> > So most upstream authors have no clue how to write apps in Qt and don't
> > look at the vast amount of documentation that come with it?
> No, it means that most upstream authors don't expect styles to be built
> as plugins.  Trolltech's documentation does *not* say that deriving from
> a plugin is wrong.  Debian and Mandrake (I think) are the only
> distributions to build styles as plugins, so many upstream authors don't
> even realize the problem.
> Of course, there isn't a good reason that I know of to build styles as
> plugins in any case, other than satisfying Martin's need to make the Qt
> packages as complicated and difficult to work with as possible.
No, I have to object here. styles should be, for the sake of the necessary 
size limit, be configured as plugins. With qt3 being able to use KDE styles 
as well (which are plugins, too), the user will only have one stlye that he 
will use. Do you expect every user to load 600 k minimum of bloat just 
because one author of a program got it wrong ? When I discover such a case 
I'm contacting the author and in all cases that I met I got an immediately 
fixed version uploaded that corrects the problem with the styles. This is the 
way IMHO to deal with this issue.

Martin is not guilty of making Qt complicated. It's upstream who is 
responsible for most of the confusion (-mt and non-mt, style plugins etc. 
etc. etc. without a clear guideline for packagers - because TT customers 
build Qt themselves and don't care about packages on Linux)

> > Yes, Martin is correct about that being a violation of policy, most
> > (all?) other libraries don't split their headers into a bunch of
> > individual packages either, but ymmv.
> Where in policy does it say that?  There's already a couple packages
> that package their static libraries separately (octave2.0-staticlibs for
> example).

Good point. Please help elaborate this to convince Martin to package the 
static libs that noone needs anyway into a separate package :-)

- -- 
We're not a company, we just produce better code at less costs.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
Ralf Nolden

The K Desktop Environment       The KDevelop Project
http://www.kde.org              http://www.kdevelop.org
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)


Reply to: