[gentoo-dev] net-www/konqueror-embedded

[gentoo-dev] net-www/konqueror-embedded

[Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.-]

net-www/konqueror-embedded has no metadata file, is a snapshot from 2001
and looks totally unmaintained by any current Gentoo developers.

Any objections to removing it from the tree?

Michael Sterrett
  -Mr. Bones.-
mr_bones_@gentoo.org

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] net-www/konqueror-embedded

[Stephen P. Becker]

I'm curious...does that depend on kde at all?  Does it work as a 
standalone browser?

Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.- wrote:
> net-www/konqueror-embedded has no metadata file, is a snapshot from 2001
> and looks totally unmaintained by any current Gentoo developers.
> 
> Any objections to removing it from the tree?
> 
> Michael Sterrett
>   -Mr. Bones.-
> mr_bones_@gentoo.org
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
> 
> 


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] net-www/konqueror-embedded

[Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.-]

No idea.  There are no deps listed in the ebuild.  I assume it needs at
least qt though.

Michael Sterrett
  -Mr. Bones.-
mr_bones_@gentoo.org

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Stephen P. Becker wrote:

> I'm curious...does that depend on kde at all?  Does it work as a 
> standalone browser?
> 
> Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.- wrote:
> > net-www/konqueror-embedded has no metadata file, is a snapshot from 2001
> > and looks totally unmaintained by any current Gentoo developers.
> > 
> > Any objections to removing it from the tree?
> > 
> > Michael Sterrett
> >   -Mr. Bones.-
> > mr_bones_@gentoo.org
> > 
> > --
> > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
> > 
> > 
> 
> 

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] net-www/konqueror-embedded

[Mike Frysinger]

On Wednesday 14 July 2004 06:35 pm, Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.- wrote:
> No idea.  There are no deps listed in the ebuild.  I assume it needs at
> least qt though.

embedded-qt !?
-mike

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: net-www/konqueror-embedded

[Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.-]

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Mike Frysinger wrote:

> On Wednesday 14 July 2004 06:35 pm, Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.- wrote:
> > No idea.  There are no deps listed in the ebuild.  I assume it needs at
> > least qt though.
> 
> embedded-qt !?

Could be... no telling since there no DEPEND stuff in there.

Michael Sterrett
  -Mr. Bones.-
mr_bones_@gentoo.org

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] net-www/konqueror-embedded

[Stephen P. Becker]

The reason I asked is that currently, mips is without a standalone 
graphical web browser because mozilla and derivatives don't work.  The 
only option is to install both kdelibs and kdebase, which isn't an 
optimal solution on the majority of our supported machines (sorry 
psi...you're still insane! ;).

I also just saw the reply from George about DO_NOT_COMPILE.  That still 
doesn't get around the kdelibs dep.

Steve

Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.- wrote:

> No idea.  There are no deps listed in the ebuild.  I assume it needs at
> least qt though.
> 
> Michael Sterrett
>   -Mr. Bones.-
> mr_bones_@gentoo.org
> 
> On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Stephen P. Becker wrote:
> 
> 
>>I'm curious...does that depend on kde at all?  Does it work as a 
>>standalone browser?
>>
>>Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.- wrote:
>>
>>>net-www/konqueror-embedded has no metadata file, is a snapshot from 2001
>>>and looks totally unmaintained by any current Gentoo developers.
>>>
>>>Any objections to removing it from the tree?
>>>
>>>Michael Sterrett
>>>  -Mr. Bones.-
>>>mr_bones_@gentoo.org
>>>
>>>--
>>>gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
> 
> 


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] net-www/konqueror-embedded

[George Shapovalov]

Looks like the upstream is lagging itself:
last snapshot konqueror3-embedded-0.2-20031201.tar.bz2
and loos like it was an attempt by somebody to pick it up. Not sure whether 
this means it is dead or still alive. 
In any case, there is no snapshot upstream corresponding to the version in the 
tree any longer, and somehow I doubt it has been put on mirrors. Thechnically 
speaking this really looks like a broken package at this point...

Actually I mostly wanted to post this question: isn't it possible to achieve 
similar effect by using DO_NOT_COMPILE var (or what is the right name)? I 
seem to remember somebody on forums reporting running a *very* stripped 
version of kde, like almost down to one app per package...

George

On Wednesday 14 July 2004 15:25, Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.- wrote:
> net-www/konqueror-embedded has no metadata file, is a snapshot from 2001
> and looks totally unmaintained by any current Gentoo developers.
>
> Any objections to removing it from the tree?
>
> Michael Sterrett
>   -Mr. Bones.-
> mr_bones_@gentoo.org
>
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] net-www/konqueror-embedded

[Carsten Lohrke]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thursday 15 July 2004 00:55, George Shapovalov wrote:
> Actually I mostly wanted to post this question: isn't it possible to
> achieve similar effect by using DO_NOT_COMPILE var (or what is the right
> name)? I seem to remember somebody on forums reporting running a *very*
> stripped version of kde, like almost down to one app per package...

DO_NOT_COMPILE removes applications, but the remaining ones won't get lighter 
iirc. And you're breaking dependencies, when stripping some application from 
a kde-base/* package.


Carsten
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA9b8OVwbzmvGLSW8RAtePAJ951vwBrP3aIKbpNLhjwRlmeBq6vwCfXQLm
rN1YX6iJuPUTcly8l0Ssey0=
=38TE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list