[gentoo-user] KDE-4.2 and KDE-3.5

[gentoo-user] KDE-4.2 and KDE-3.5

[Dmitry Makovey]

Hi,

I was tracking KDE-4.x for a while now while sticking to "stable" KDE-3.5, which in gentoo's case is 3.5.9. Trying to get KDE-4.2 installed spits out a blocker:

[blocks B     ] <=kde-base/kdebase-startkde-3.5.10 ("<=kde-base/kdebase-startkde-3.5.10" is blocking kde-base/kdelibs-4.2.0)

which for me means switching to *2* testing platforms (3.5.10 and 4.2) when I want to test only 1 (4.2).

Now my question is: how safe is it to do a workaround, and create local version of kde-base/kdelibs-4.2.0-r1 ebuild (say, -r2) which removes the block and just stick with 3.5.9 on 3.5 side ? I really don't feel like unmasking 3.5.10 builds and building them too.

another confusing thing is:
	!<=kde-base/kdebase-3.5.9-r4
	!<=kde-base/kdebase-startkde-3.5.10
which I read as "you're fine using kde-3.5.9 as long as you don't use startkde". kind of weird.

__ 
    This communication is intended for the use of the recipient to whom it
    is addressed, and may contain confidential, personal, and or privileged
    information. Please contact us immediately if you are not the intended
    recipient of this communication, and do not copy, distribute, or take
    action relying on it. Any communications received in error, or
    subsequent reply, should be deleted or destroyed.
---

[gentoo-user] Re: KDE-4.2 and KDE-3.5

[Nikos Chantziaras]

Dmitry Makovey wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I was tracking KDE-4.x for a while now while sticking to "stable" KDE-3.5, which in gentoo's case is 3.5.9. Trying to get KDE-4.2 installed spits out a blocker:
> 
> [blocks B     ] <=kde-base/kdebase-startkde-3.5.10 ("<=kde-base/kdebase-startkde-3.5.10" is blocking kde-base/kdelibs-4.2.0)
> 
> which for me means switching to *2* testing platforms (3.5.10 and 4.2) when I want to test only 1 (4.2).
> 
> Now my question is: how safe is it to do a workaround, and create local version of kde-base/kdelibs-4.2.0-r1 ebuild (say, -r2) which removes the block and just stick with 3.5.9 on 3.5 side ? I really don't feel like unmasking 3.5.10 builds and building them too.
> 
> another confusing thing is:
> 	!<=kde-base/kdebase-3.5.9-r4
> 	!<=kde-base/kdebase-startkde-3.5.10
> which I read as "you're fine using kde-3.5.9 as long as you don't use startkde". kind of weird.

I know you didn't ask for this answer, but KDE 3.5.10 is *not* masked. 
It's in ~arch.  It should be a safe/stable update since it's a bug-fix 
release (and I assume it's the last release of the KDE3 series.)

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: KDE-4.2 and KDE-3.5

[Philip Webb]

090131 Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> Dmitry Makovey wrote:
>> I was tracking KDE-4.x for a while while sticking to "stable" KDE-3.5.,, 
>> Trying to get KDE-4.2 installed spits out a blocker:
>> [blocks B     ] <=kde-base/kdebase-startkde-3.5.10 
>> ("<=kde-base/kdebase-startkde-3.5.10" is blocking kde-base/kdelibs-4.2.0)
>> which for me means switching to *2* testing platforms (3.5.10 and 4.2) 
>> Now my question is: how safe is it to do a workaround
> KDE 3.5.10 is *not* masked. It's in ~arch. 
> It should be a safe/stable update since it's a bug-fix release 

I've been using 3.5.10 since 080924 without any problems:
just update to that & then try emerging 4.2.0 .

My feeling remains that KDE 4 is more eye-candy than useful,
but I do understand the KDE team's motivation for developing it
& no doubt it will supersede KDE 3 over the next year or so.
My plan is to try out 4.2.1 when it's released & gets into testing.

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,   Philip Webb
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|   Cities Centre, University of Toronto
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'   purslowatchassdotutorontodotca

[gentoo-user] Re: KDE-4.2 and KDE-3.5

[Nikos Chantziaras]

Philip Webb wrote:
> 090131 Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>> Dmitry Makovey wrote:
>>> I was tracking KDE-4.x for a while while sticking to "stable" KDE-3.5.,, 
>>> Trying to get KDE-4.2 installed spits out a blocker:
>>> [blocks B     ] <=kde-base/kdebase-startkde-3.5.10 
>>> ("<=kde-base/kdebase-startkde-3.5.10" is blocking kde-base/kdelibs-4.2.0)
>>> which for me means switching to *2* testing platforms (3.5.10 and 4.2) 
>>> Now my question is: how safe is it to do a workaround
>> KDE 3.5.10 is *not* masked. It's in ~arch. 
>> It should be a safe/stable update since it's a bug-fix release 
> 
> I've been using 3.5.10 since 080924 without any problems:
> just update to that & then try emerging 4.2.0 .
> 
> My feeling remains that KDE 4 is more eye-candy than useful,

That has always been a goal with KDE anyway.  We can't have OS X and 
Vista/Windows 7 win those beauty contests, now can we ;)

Anyway, 4.2.0 is what sealed the deal for me.  I went back to KDE 3 
after trying KDE 4.0.  I went again back to 3 after trying the first 4.1 
version.  And again after the latest 4.1 update (4.1.4).  With 4.2.0, it 
seems it is a worthy replacement for KDE 3 for me.  I didn't login to 
KDE 3 since I installed it (2 days ago).  I like it, but I hope no 
show-stopper shows up :P

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: KDE-4.2 and KDE-3.5

[Dale]

Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> Dmitry Makovey wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I was tracking KDE-4.x for a while now while sticking to "stable"
>> KDE-3.5, which in gentoo's case is 3.5.9. Trying to get KDE-4.2
>> installed spits out a blocker:
>>
>> [blocks B     ] <=kde-base/kdebase-startkde-3.5.10
>> ("<=kde-base/kdebase-startkde-3.5.10" is blocking
>> kde-base/kdelibs-4.2.0)
>>
>> which for me means switching to *2* testing platforms (3.5.10 and
>> 4.2) when I want to test only 1 (4.2).
>>
>> Now my question is: how safe is it to do a workaround, and create
>> local version of kde-base/kdelibs-4.2.0-r1 ebuild (say, -r2) which
>> removes the block and just stick with 3.5.9 on 3.5 side ? I really
>> don't feel like unmasking 3.5.10 builds and building them too.
>>
>> another confusing thing is:
>>     !<=kde-base/kdebase-3.5.9-r4
>>     !<=kde-base/kdebase-startkde-3.5.10
>> which I read as "you're fine using kde-3.5.9 as long as you don't use
>> startkde". kind of weird.
>
> I know you didn't ask for this answer, but KDE 3.5.10 is *not* masked.
> It's in ~arch.  It should be a safe/stable update since it's a bug-fix
> release (and I assume it's the last release of the KDE3 series.)
>
>
>

KDE-3.5.10 has been on here a while and is stable for me at least.  I
haven't checked its current status since I have not synced in a while
anyway. 

OP, if you have a fairly fast machine, maybe there is some package that
just needs to be recompiled but is getting missed for some reason.  I
would try a emerge -e world and see what that does for it.  If you still
have the same problem, may need some Raid.  If not, well, it works. :-D

Dale

:-) 

Re: [gentoo-user] KDE-4.2 and KDE-3.5

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1063 bytes --]

On Sat, 31 Jan 2009 13:09:12 -0700 (MST), Dmitry Makovey wrote:

> Now my question is: how safe is it to do a workaround, and create local
> version of kde-base/kdelibs-4.2.0-r1 ebuild (say, -r2) which removes
> the block and just stick with 3.5.9 on 3.5 side ? I really don't feel
> like unmasking 3.5.10 builds and building them too.

The devs put that block on for a reason. You are free to remove it safe in
the knowledge that you can claim sole responsibility for all the broken
pieces. This seems a lot more risky than running a well-tested ~arch
package.

> another confusing thing is:
> 	!<=kde-base/kdebase-3.5.9-r4
> 	!<=kde-base/kdebase-startkde-3.5.10
> which I read as "you're fine using kde-3.5.9 as long as you don't use
> startkde". kind of weird.

Not at all. All versions of startkde older than 3.5.10-r1 cause a
problem with KDE4. Using a more recent version or no version at all.
Some people may have their own custom KDE startup scripts.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Don't take life too seriously, you won't get out alive.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]