[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: ANNOUNCE: Heading for KDE 1.1.2 release (Week 4)
From:       Bernd Gehrmann <bernd () physik ! hu-berlin ! de>
Date:       1999-06-18 18:21:49
[Download RAW message or body]

On Fri, 18 Jun 1999 Ralf Nolden wrote:
>KDE itself has the KDE-SDK as a package with the most needed software
>for development, but the SDK is apparently not distributed as e.g. an
>rpm package (I may be wrong here as well, but I got my first version of
>the KDE-SDK from the ftp snapshots, not from my SuSE distribution). 

If it isn't, then the right thing would be to make a package,
but without kdoc and without KDevelop.

>Someone who wants to install KDE by his distribution expects that when
>he installs a kde-devel.rpm or whatsoever package and gets the
>information that it contains all he needs for KDE development including
>an IDE and a Debugger, that this really is the case. 

Mmh, consequently you'd have to put gcc and make also into that package,
because otherwise the IDE would be quite useless :-) Seriously: It
should be no problem to make a package kde-devel that consists only
of dependencies. That's how e. g. the complete X11 system is pulled
in in slink. In such a way, it is still possible to update single
components without having to download a huge package.

>-A set of HTML documentation of the KDE-1.1.2 libs (we would adapt the
>kdeveloprc file to ensure it is found on kdevelop setup and installed
>correctly)

I think for a well-designed package the setup process should be
completely unnecessary. The right way to handle system-dependent
paths would be to add --with-qt-docpath and --with-kdelibs-docpath
(or similar) options to configure. 

>Further, I would like to allow a download of the KDE-1.1.2 libs
>documentation as well as the KDevelop handbooks as postscript versions,
>so whoever wants or needs it besides the HTML version can print it out.

Yes.

Bernd.

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]