Finer grained kde*-meta packages (was: Make portage assume, that a package is install

Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. <bss03volumehost.net> wrote:

> However, I suggest that a cleaner method would be to
not install kde-meta
> or kdenetwork-meta at all but instead just install the
KDE applications
> that you require.

Actually, I disagree.

This would (obviously *g*) mean, that kde-meta cannot be
installed
(just as you say). This means, that a whole "shit
load" of packages
would need to be manually installed. And all that, just
because you
don't want one or two packages?

Nah. IMO that's the wrong way around. IMO the correct way
would
be to enhance the kde*-meta packages so, that they support
USE flags,
which allow the user to select what's to be installed.

Eg. a "ppp" flag to select that ppp related stuff
is to be installed.
Or "filesharing" to disable filesharing related
stuf (kdenetwork-filesharing
and kpf - or whatever). Or if you don't use feeds, why
install
dcoprss and knewsticker?

I mean, what's the advantage of the kde*-meta packages over
the kde
package, when the kde*-meta require just as much
"junk", as the
kde package does? Hm, really, what's the use of the
kde*-meta package
anyway?

Alexander Skwar

-- 
gentoo-usergentoo.org mailing list

Am Freitag, 15. Juni 2007 schrieb ext Alexander Skwar:

> This would (obviously *g*) mean, that kde-meta cannot
be installed
> (just as you say). This means, that a whole "shit
load" of packages
> would need to be manually installed. And all that, just
because you
> don't want one or two packages?
>
> Nah. IMO that's the wrong way around. IMO the correct
way would
> be to enhance the kde*-meta packages so, that they
support USE flags,
> which allow the user to select what's to be installed.

I completely agree with Alexander about this. Meta (not only
the kde ones) 
packages should definitely have USE flags.

> I mean, what's the advantage of the kde*-meta packages
over the kde
> package, when the kde*-meta require just as much
"junk", as the
> kde package does? Hm, really, what's the use of the
kde*-meta package
> anyway?

Allow for selective update (kmail-3.5.6 ->
kmail-3.5.6-r1) instead of 
updating kdenetwork.

Bye...

	Dirk
-- 
Dirk Heinrichs          | Tel:  +49 (0)162 234 3408
Configuration Manager   | Fax:  +49 (0)211 47068 111
Capgemini Deutschland   | Mail: dirk.heinrichscapgemini.com
Wanheimerstraße 68      | Web:  http://www.capgemini.com

D-40468 Düsseldorf      | ICQ#: 110037733
GPG Public Key C2E467BB | Keyserver: www.keyserver.net

On Friday 15 June 2007, Alexander Skwar <listenalexander.skwar.name> wrote 
about '[gentoo-user]  Finer grained kde*-meta packages (was:
Make portage 
assume, that a package is installed)':
> Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. <bss03volumehost.net> wrote:
> > However, I suggest that a cleaner method would be
to not install
> > kde-meta or kdenetwork-meta at all but instead
just install the KDE
> > applications that you require.
>
> Actually, I disagree.
>
> This would (obviously *g*) mean, that kde-meta cannot
be installed
> (just as you say).

Yes, because the upstream kde includes, in particular,
kppp.

> This means, that a whole "shit load" of
packages 
> would need to be manually installed. And all that, just
because you
> don't want one or two packages?

Yep.  You get kde-meta or individual kde packages or you get
your own 
ebuild that depends on a number of KDE packages.  The Gentoo
developers do 
quite a bit of work just to give us kde-meta.  Be glad they
don't stick 
you with the monolithic ebuilds.

> Nah. IMO that's the wrong way around. IMO the correct
way would
> be to enhance the kde*-meta packages so, that they
support USE flags,
> which allow the user to select what's to be installed.

I suppose that's a good idea in the future.  Perhaps you
should file an 
enhancement bug.  That said, I would prefer kde-meta install
all the 
packages that are part of KDE's upstream packaging by
default.

> Eg. a "ppp" flag to select that ppp related
stuff is to be installed.
> Or "filesharing" to disable filesharing
related stuf

Do you suggest a global flag?

If so, what packages do you recommend this flags modify the
behavior of?

If not, shouldn't it have a less ambiguous name?

> I mean, what's the advantage of the kde*-meta packages
over the kde
> package, when the kde*-meta require just as much
"junk", as the
> kde package does? Hm, really, what's the use of the
kde*-meta package
> anyway?

The kde-meta package is meant to replace the kde package. 
The is no 
advantage (and without a workable confcache, at least one
disadvantage) to 
running split ebuilds.  The advantage of split ebilds is
that you have the 
choice to install only the kde applications you want, by
using the 
individual ebaulds, without dragging in all of kde (which is
what "old" 
style kde packages pulled in as a dependency.)

Are the monolithic ebuilds still available?  They need to be
purged from 
the tree ASAP.

- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.                     ,= ,-_-. =. 
bss03volumehost.net                      ((_/)o o(_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy           `-'(. .)`-' 
http://iguanasuicide.org/                      _/     

On Friday 15 June 2007, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> I mean, what's the advantage of the kde*-meta packages
over the kde
> package, when the kde*-meta require just as much
"junk", as the
> kde package does? Hm, really, what's the use of the
kde*-meta package
> anyway?

The -meta packages are a good idea. With the old style kde
or kdepim etc 
packages, you got everything whether you liked it or not.
Putting a USE 
flag on such an ebuild to build all of kdepim except kppp
would be ... 
tricky at best.

The -meta packages split everything in kde up on an app
level, but there 
is the disadvantage that you now have 300 ebuilds to choose
from and 
get to list *all* the ones you want.

Perhaps the best route (maybe a good feature request?) is to
put USE 
flags in the -meta ebuilds. Then you get the full
configurability of 
what -meta gives, plus an easy way to omit stuff without
having to list 
>100 desired packages

alan



-- 
Optimists say the glass is half full,
Pessimists say the glass is half empty,
Developers say wtf is the glass twice as big as it needs to
be?

Alan McKinnon
alan at linuxholdings dot co dot za
+27 82, double three seven, one nine three five
-- 
gentoo-usergentoo.org mailing list