From: Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: any interest in removing /usr/qt and /usr/kde ?
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:19:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200409281019.35486.pauldv@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <loom.20040928T044859-585@post.gmane.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2621 bytes --]
On Tuesday 28 September 2004 04:51, John Croisant wrote:
> I'm a fan of tearing KDE/QT apart and scattering the pieces into their
> proper, FHS-friendly places. That is, /usr/kde/share might become
> /usr/share/kde-X.Y, and so on. /usr/{kde,qt}/ would be phased out
> (perhaps keep a directory full of symlinks to the new places while
> everything settles). Whether or not this is feasible, I can't say --
> but it sure would be fun for whoever writes the ebuild!
Too much fun. Have you ever tried to maintain patches on a package with
new versions comming out all the time?
>
> To let multiple versions co-exist, you could use version appending for
> directories/libraries (/usr/lib/kde-X.Y) (this is what gnome-2 uses, as
> foser pointed out,
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/21414 ). I don't see
> anything in the FHS this goes against (in word or spirit, as I read
> it), and a few packages in portage already use this style (not just in
> /usr/share, but in /usr/lib, /usr/bin, etc). Taking a peek in /usr/lib,
> I see Abiword-2.0, gtk-2.0, the gnome-related libraries, and python
> having directories using this versioning system (although python
> doesn't use the dash). Plus, it seems (to me, at least!) to make sense:
> the shared directories are versioned, the library files directly in
> /usr/lib are versioned (libfoo.so[.x[.y.z]]), so why not the library
> directories in /usr/lib?
Do you realize that this would amount to serious patches on kde. KDE
expects KDEDIR(S) to work the way it does currently. I know it is not
ideal, but neither is the FHS.
>
> The FHS defines the bare minimum (and a few optional) presence of
> directories, but beyond that some decision should be made, ideally
> between distros (and maybe even between *nixes), as to what
> hierarchy/naming conventions should be used for subdirectories.
>
> Hopefully, the new major versions of KDE and QT will make it clearer
> where they should go (perhaps by separating the files in a FHS-friendly
> way). I don't think that leaving /usr/{kde,qt} in place for the current
> versions, and "starting fresh" with the new versions would work,
> because you'd have to keep the current versions around anyway (or start
> up this discussion again) for applications that don't get updated to
> the new KDE or QT versions.
You might petition to the qt/kde people, I don't give you much chance, but
the main reason for the current setup is based on the kde/qt setup.
Paul
--
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-09-28 8:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-09-19 19:50 [gentoo-dev] any interest in removing /usr/qt and /usr/kde ? Thomas Weidner
2004-09-19 19:52 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2004-09-19 20:07 ` Mike Frysinger
2004-09-19 20:06 ` Dan Armak
2004-09-19 20:07 ` Joshua J. Berry
2004-09-19 20:13 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2004-09-19 20:16 ` Dan Armak
2004-09-19 20:26 ` Joshua J. Berry
2004-09-19 20:29 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2004-09-19 22:23 ` Joshua J. Berry
2004-09-20 8:41 ` Paul de Vrieze
2004-09-19 20:37 ` Dan Armak
2004-09-19 21:23 ` Malte S. Stretz
2004-09-19 23:38 ` Armando Di Cianno
2004-09-20 8:48 ` Paul de Vrieze
2004-09-20 9:47 ` Malte S. Stretz
2004-09-20 15:56 ` Armando Di Cianno
2004-09-20 19:52 ` Malte S. Stretz
2004-09-20 15:40 ` Dan Armak
2004-09-20 18:30 ` Paul de Vrieze
2004-09-20 19:45 ` Malte S. Stretz
2004-09-19 22:35 ` Joshua J. Berry
2004-09-20 4:10 ` Dan Armak
2004-09-20 4:27 ` Mike Frysinger
2004-09-20 4:47 ` Luke-Jr
2004-09-20 6:09 ` Joshua J. Berry
2004-09-20 9:05 ` Paul de Vrieze
2004-09-20 15:55 ` Sami Samhuri
2004-09-20 16:22 ` Carsten Lohrke
2004-09-20 16:36 ` Malte S. Stretz
2004-09-20 16:44 ` Dan Armak
2004-09-20 17:19 ` Malte S. Stretz
2004-09-20 17:36 ` Dan Armak
2004-09-20 22:58 ` foser
2004-09-20 17:42 ` Carsten Lohrke
2004-09-20 16:37 ` Dan Armak
2004-09-20 17:35 ` Carsten Lohrke
2004-09-20 18:52 ` Paul de Vrieze
2004-09-20 19:17 ` Carsten Lohrke
2004-09-21 10:47 ` [gentoo-dev] " Duncan
2004-09-21 11:02 ` Duncan
2004-09-21 12:05 ` Carsten Lohrke
2004-09-21 4:58 ` Joel Konkle-Parker
2004-09-21 9:49 ` Paul de Vrieze
2004-09-20 7:49 ` [gentoo-dev] " Simon Watson
2004-09-19 20:09 ` Paul de Vrieze
2004-09-28 2:51 ` [gentoo-dev] " John Croisant
2004-09-28 8:19 ` Paul de Vrieze [this message]
2004-09-28 9:24 ` Peter Ruskin
2004-09-28 9:37 ` Paul de Vrieze
2004-09-28 20:32 ` John Croisant
2004-09-29 9:07 ` Paul de Vrieze
2004-09-19 21:55 ` [gentoo-dev] " Luke-Jr
2004-09-19 23:06 ` [gentoo-dev] " Thomas Weidner
2004-09-20 0:03 ` Luke-Jr
2004-09-20 0:55 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2004-09-20 3:50 ` Luke-Jr
2004-09-21 5:10 ` Joel Konkle-Parker
2004-09-21 17:29 ` Helmar Wieland
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200409281019.35486.pauldv@gentoo.org \
--to=pauldv@gentoo.org \
--cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox