VectorLinux
December 22, 2014, 06:27:26 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Visit our home page for VL info. To search the old message board go to http://vectorlinux.com/forum1. The first VL forum is temporarily offline until we can find a host for it. Thanks for your patience.
 
Now powered by KnowledgeDex.
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Please support VectorLinux!
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Upcoming KDE packages.  (Read 5582 times)
exeterdad
Packager
Vectorian
****
Posts: 2046



« on: July 26, 2007, 03:48:33 am »

Forgive my boldness.  But since we are about to move on to a new release of VL and are looking at angles to give VL the edge. I thought now might be the time to speak up before we are too deep into it.

I've wondered why the KDE packages are packaged in bulk rather then breaking them down to only include the application the user actually wants.  I know it's practical and less complicated to package according to the way KDE sends out their source code, but if a user wants one particular application that is within a package, they have no choice but to install the rest of the bloat as well.  I know I've run in to that over and over again, and is part of the reason I choose not to use KDE.  I do not like having to scan through unused menu entries to launch a needed app.

Breaking things down would assist our dial up users, those with limited disk space and VL Standard users wanting a minimal KDE install.

It doesn't seem to be the Slackware way as far as I can see, but I think we are "Slackware Improved"  why not improve it a bit more?

Building the KDE packages in this way really wouldn't be so hard and I would be more than willing to shift my package building time in that direction if we were to accept my proposal.  We would just need to discuss and come up with a standard of which packages would be packaged separately and what ones were packaged in bulk.

Have any thoughts on this?
Logged
roseway
Packager
Vectorite
****
Posts: 135



« Reply #1 on: July 26, 2007, 04:13:08 am »

Personally I prefer the kitchen sink approach, but I can see that breaking the packages up would be very helpful to people wanting lighter less bloated systems, and people on dial-up. Perhaps meta packages could be provided as a way to join up the packages which have been split, so users have both options.
Logged

Eric
The Headacher
Louder than you
Global Moderator
Vectorian
*****
Posts: 1553


I like the bass to go BOOM!


WWW
« Reply #2 on: July 26, 2007, 04:44:52 am »

I always thought some of the kde apps where nice, but most are just overkill for me. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem very easy to me to compile the packages seperately. However, if you could figure out a way to get just kmix without the rest of the kdemultimedia package I'd be delighted to know Wink (I love kmix but loathe the rest of kdemultimedia).

Logged

Most music on my soundcloud page was arranged in programs running on VL.
exeterdad
Packager
Vectorian
****
Posts: 2046



« Reply #3 on: July 26, 2007, 05:13:58 am »

I've never singled out "kmix".  But usually to separate individual KDE apps, you build and install the "core" KDE stuff (qt, kdelibs. kdebase, etc).  Then you would take kdemultimedia (for example) and "configure" and "make" it the normal way.  Then cd into the individual apps folder and run "make install" because each app has it's own makefile.  If you were building for yourself, you could just "configure" cd into app directory and "make" "make install"  and save tons of time since the unwanted apps wouldn't be built.  That's in a nutshell of course.  Packaging would be a different matter.
Logged
Joe1962
Administrator
Vectorian
*****
Posts: 2499



WWW
« Reply #4 on: July 26, 2007, 05:24:17 am »

JohnB316 has been kind enough to do some individual KDE apps for me "by demand", so to speak. Things like cervisia and kate, which I could run on Standard with just kdelibs installed. But this would probably mean a lot of extra packaging work, as well as redundancy of packages with respect to SOHO. Some of the apps are worth it I guess, though most aren't. This is a complicated, but interesting subject which probably merits further and perhaps more detailed discussion. We might end up with a more bloat-free SOHO, but then again, we might find ourselves banging our heads against the typical impossibility of satisfying all tastes... Undecided
Logged

O'Neill (RE the Asgard): "Usually they ask nicely before they ignore us and do what they damn well please."
http://joe1962.bigbox.info
Running: VL 7 Std 64 + self-cooked XFCE-4.10
The Headacher
Louder than you
Global Moderator
Vectorian
*****
Posts: 1553


I like the bass to go BOOM!


WWW
« Reply #5 on: July 26, 2007, 05:25:15 am »

Oh, I am SO going to try that. I just can't stand all those annoying programs in kdemultimedia, except kmix Smiley. I also keep kdegraphics just because of kpdf... This sounds like the perfect job for an ugly SlackBuild!

Thanks!
Logged

Most music on my soundcloud page was arranged in programs running on VL.
exeterdad
Packager
Vectorian
****
Posts: 2046



« Reply #6 on: July 26, 2007, 05:32:16 am »

Quote
we might find ourselves banging our heads against the typical impossibility of satisfying all tastes

There's no argument there.  I don't think it's possible to match everyones taste.  This is Linux after all.  We is P-I-C-K-Y.  But I believe we could find a happy medium that the majority would accept.
Logged
retired1af
Packager
Vectorian
****
Posts: 1269



« Reply #7 on: July 26, 2007, 06:19:28 am »

One of the reasons I prefer SOHO over Standard is the abundance of programs SOHO provides, including all the apps in KDE. While I may not use all of them regularly, I do use a good chunk of them from time to time. To have to sit down and choose during install which packages to include for the build does not fill me with warm fuzzies.

While the idea of compartmentalizing the apps within KDE to make a light version warrants further investigation, I'm not sure it's something we want to explore for SOHO. It would, however, be an excellent project for Standard for those that like KDE.
Logged

ASUS K73 Intel i3 Dual Core 2.3GHz
exeterdad
Packager
Vectorian
****
Posts: 2046



« Reply #8 on: July 26, 2007, 06:59:30 am »

One of the reasons I prefer SOHO over Standard is the abundance of programs SOHO provides, including all the apps in KDE. While I may not use all of them regularly, I do use a good chunk of them from time to time. To have to sit down and choose during install which packages to include for the build does not fill me with warm fuzzies.

While the idea of compartmentalizing the apps within KDE to make a light version warrants further investigation, I'm not sure it's something we want to explore for SOHO. It would, however, be an excellent project for Standard for those that like KDE.

If a "meta package" was made.  It would be (if that's what you wanted) a one click install like it is now  Smiley  It's a possibility to have "the kitchen sink" as a default SOHO install.  And if the packages were busted up, you could uninstall unwanted apps without losing the entire catagory.
« Last Edit: July 26, 2007, 07:02:34 am by exeterdad » Logged
The Headacher
Louder than you
Global Moderator
Vectorian
*****
Posts: 1553


I like the bass to go BOOM!


WWW
« Reply #9 on: July 26, 2007, 09:04:22 am »

I'm just testing the kmix I built (after removing kdemultimedia) and it seems to work fine so far. I suppose somebody with better scripting skills / more patience could script something that would make a package for everything in kdemultimedia. This can probably also be done with some of the other kde* packages. You'd need to write a lot of package descriptions though Undecided.

I agree it's too much work to make a seperate package for every application now in a kde* package. For those of us who are this picky I am working on a SlackBuild to help here, but it's probably easier to just do it by hand.
Logged

Most music on my soundcloud page was arranged in programs running on VL.
exeterdad
Packager
Vectorian
****
Posts: 2046



« Reply #10 on: July 26, 2007, 09:50:13 am »

Glad to see you have it working.  Pretty satisfying isn't it?

I admit it would take a bit of time, but if a script was made for each package that included the text for the slack-desc and the .desktop file (if modification is nessesary), they could all be placed in a directory, then a master slackbuild with all the global settings could fire them off. 

Once the build system is completed, it wouldn't take much to maintain future KDE builds. Even if the original packager isn't around anymore.

I'd like to see a "smart" doit.sh script in the packages that sniff out the users version of VL and moves the menu files to a sane destination.  That way a user can enjoy KDE apps within their desktop of choice.  Many desktops are compatible with KDE's menu layout.  Unfortunatley Xfce isn't one of them.

The recent compatibility headaches with the standalone K3b is a example of why I think we should go this route.

I am interested on JohnB16's thoughts about this.  I believe he is the current KDE guru, along with this and that.  Busy guy.
Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!