On Wednesday 30 May 2001 16:22, Rob Kaper wrote:
> On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 04:02:38PM +0200, Guillaume Laurent wrote:
> > ... It doesn't look like a hassle for you because you never really had to
> > do it. Take my word for it, it *IS* one big fscking hassle.
>
> I am using bare Slackware and don't check out kdesupport to compile KDE.
> It's still no hassle.

May be we have different definitions of "no hassle" :-). Don't take it the 
wrong way, but I think it is a hassle for you as well, although you just 
don't realize it.

There is also the fact that the libs we depend on do not evolve quite a lot, 
so you don't have to upgrade them very often if at all. But for a new 
developer, having to download half a dozen libs from different places is a 
chore.

> The problem is that many distributions already ship some (but not others)
> of the stuff that used to be in kdesupport. Compiling and installing our
> own included versions over those is usually exactly what creates the
> dependency problems! Perhaps KDE will run smoothly, but other programs
> won't anymore!

Yes, that is a problem. The suggested solution to do like Qt and disable 
compilation of things which are already installed is quite good.

> It is not the job of KDE to make sure you meet the requirements. It is our
> job to inform you what those are as soon as possible, by having configure
> report it and perhaps by automatically parsing the configure.in.bot files
> and always have an up-to-date compile instructions page.

But it is KDE's job to be as easy to enter as possible. And kdesupport goes a 
very long way in this direction.

-- 
Guillaume
http://www.telegraph-road.org