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

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: Ideas [?]
From:       Rob Kaper <cap () capsi ! cx>
Date:       1999-11-25 3:09:51
[Download RAW message or body]

On Wed, Nov 24, 1999 at 06:17:47PM -0800, Charles Samuels wrote:
> Everyone is running on different C and C++ libraries, some will have a
> different version of QT and the KDE libs, and they're all using a different
> package format, like deb, rpm, pkg (wherever that went), tgz's etc.

And surprisingly everything works most of the time! ;-)

> I was wondering about the feasibility of totally standardizing the KDE
> system (for KDE 2.0, I suppose).  kde-libs consists not only of the KDE
> libraries, but also a standard libstdc, which _all_ KDE programs, and
> libraries (including the QT that is distributed) are linked to. This means
> that no matter what distribution you run, there's nothing to require a
> user to have to do the ritualistic ./configure;make;make install

To be really sure, we should ship XFree with KDE, and add our own kernel,
and GNU utilities of which there are KDE front-ends.

No seriously, you are definitely right that a single distribution point of
libraries and such can have a great advantage here. However, I'd have
serious doubts if KDE would come with it's own libstdc. I can handle
kdesupport as it is, in fact it beats Gnome's "install 40 apps before you
will even find out it gnome-libs compiles this time" system. But quite
frankly, I _like_ ./configure && make && sudo make install a lot.

> More so, there would be a lot less bugs related to these libraries for the
> developers (us, ok.. maybe not "me", yet :) since everyone will run the same
> library versions.  Imagine, only one executable package that any distribution
> can run without a hitch.

Sorry if I rant a bit too much against this idea, but what makes you think
everybody wants to run the same things and versions? Should we all get the
same hardware as well? (that would really make things easier!)

I'm also a bit confused. I get the impression you are talking about binary
distributions of KDE. In that case, it's not so hard for Linux distributions
to compile their packages for whatever they use. The user doesn't even need
to care. Let alone have to do "the ritualistic ./configure;make;make
install".

> Here's a URL that might interest you:
> http://www.linuxbase.org

I'm all for Linux Base. But I do think it's the task of the distributions to
get together and make some agreements on package formats, library versions,
etc. And not for KDE to decide or force upon users/distributions.

Rob
-- 
Rob Kaper | mail: cap@capsi.com + cap@capsi.cx
          | web: http://capsi.com/ + http://capsi.cx/
          | "We continue to be guided by the most basic American values:
          |  innovation, integrity, serving customers, partnership, quality,
          |  and giving back to the community." -- Bill Gates of Microsoft

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