| Newsgroups |
gmane.linux.lfs.beyond.devel |
| Message-ID |
<[email protected]> |
Am 16.01.25 um 11:08 schrieb Pierre Labastie ([email protected]
via blfs-dev Mailing List):
> Le mercredi 15 janvier 2025 à 22:53 +0100, Rainer Fiebig a écrit :
>> Am 15.01.25 um 19:08 schrieb Pierre Labastie ([email protected]
>> via blfs-dev Mailing List):
>>> Le mercredi 15 janvier 2025 à 17:13 +0100, Rainer Fiebig a écrit :
>>>> Am 15.01.25 um 16:02 schrieb Rahul Chandra
>>>> ([email protected] via
>>>> blfs-dev Mailing List):
>>>>> On 2025-01-15 07:58, Rainer Fiebig wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry, but from my perspective as a user this doesn't seem to
>>>>>> be
>>>>>> a good
>>>>>> idea. If I understand correctly, it would complicate and
>>>>>> fragment a
>>>>>> coherent and proven KDE-build-sequence and thus make life
>>>>>> (even)
>>>>>> harder
>>>>>> for users. I'm not against reducing redundancy, though.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If we call it kf6-minimal and kf6-additional I could see it as
>>>>> okay
>>>>> and
>>>>> not **that** confusing to the user.
>>>> At least one user _is_ confused already. ;)
>>>>
>>>> I really cant't see any benefit for users from this and I think
>>>> that
>>>> the
>>>> changes would be made for the wrong reason (jhalfs). KDE-
>>>> Frameworks
>>>> is
>>>> an entity that can and IMO should be built in one go and not one
>>>> part
>>>> here and another part there. Complicating and fragmenting the
>>>> process
>>>> surely wouldn't help users.
>>>
>>> It is already fragmented: breeze-icons in the "icons" chapter and
>>> extra-cmake-modules in the KDE introduction chapter. This just adds
>>> three others that would be built in the KDE introduction chapter.
>>> Note
>> Why three? If I counted correctly, five FW-packages are used in
>> LXQT:
>> - kwindowsystem
>> - kconfig
>> - solid
>> - kidletime
>> - kwayland
>>
>> That would be five additional out-commented packages in the FW-md5
>> file.
>
>
>
> Nope: three in frameworks, two in plasma. But ok, since the only
OK, kwayland belongs to the Plasma-stack but the other four to
Frameworks. All four are used for LXQT and none of them is mentioned in
the KDE-introduction. But anyway...
> persons who answered were against the change, I'll retire it...
>
> I submitted it because having two places in the book where the same
> package can be built is not clear IMO, specially because the two builds
> don't place the package in the same directory (and don't tell me
> warnings are enough to prevent building them twice: if a user begins
> with LXQt, then builds KDE, there is no warning in KDE... But this is
> how the book is and changing things that have been there for a while,
> even if they are troublesome in some case, is always difficult, because
> people are used to it.
Regarding change: I still remember the discussion we had when I
suggested to add "kio-extras" to the book. And the one who was
vehemently against it was you. ;)
Anyway - I'm not against change in general or streamlining or
decluttering the books. But trying to take a user's perspective, I see
more disadvantages than advantages in what you proposed. But perhaps
it's more a matter of the implementation than the idea as such. Maybe
there's an other, simpler way to achieve both, user-benefit and
improvements for jhalfs.
>
> Sorry for the noise
No problem at all. You pointed to something that you think should be
improved. That's not noise in my book. ;)
Rainer
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/sympa/info/blfs-dev
Unsubscribe: See the above information page