On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 02:14, DJ Lucas <[email protected]> wrote: > On 11/28/2010 02:17 PM, Robert Xu wrote: >> On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 14:30, DJ Lucas <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On 11/28/2010 12:55 PM, Robert Xu wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> I finally have some working cmake scripts for Trinity, courtesy of >>>> samelian on Freenode, since we do not want to use a crappy and old >>>> autoconf. >>>> I'm testing them right now, which brings me to another subject: Will >>>> cmake be included into BLFS? >>>> >>> >>> Either now or later. If you've got working scripts for Trinity, then now >>> is as good a time as any. I'm currently prepping for Xorg-7.6. Looks >>> like we are waiting on only a couple of modules (libdrm-2.4.23, >>> evdev-2.6.0, xf86-video-intel-2.14.0, and xorg-server-1.9.3, and a >>> couple of lesser important packages that escape me right now). Does >>> cmake drag in any deps that aren't a part of the book as it is now? >>> >> >> As far as I'm aware, no. >> >> Hm. All I am waiting on now is for scripts for arts and tqtinterface, >> unless I just missed them. >> Once the cmake scripts for those come in, I'll test them. Hopefully we >> can throw in a minimal Trinity system to replace that old KDE3 :) >> >> *hails samelian, he is the greatest for making Trinity work with cmake ;P* >> >> You can see what I've seen so far at http://lincom.ietherpad.com/7 >> > > Robert, > > Sorry in advance for the length of this post, but lots of work to be > done and I want to make sure we are on the same page. > > I pulled everything from SVN. Looks like everything is exactly 3.5.12, > with openssl-1.0.0b fixes and cmake scripts. I can roll new tarballs > from there if desired, or can make patches to add the openssl and cmake > changes. I'm more inclined to roll our own simply because of the ugly > (non-standard) layout. If it were only arts and tqtinterface, I could > deal (and still _can_), but I don't want to explain the same thing 20 > times in the book. I'd hope that going forward, the release tarballs > will be a little more polished. I might get in touch with the maintainer > and see if that can't happen for future releases after we have a nice > clean build layout in the book. >
I see. > Also, reviewing your notes at the above link. Looks like tqtinterface > builds fine without qt4 (moved it out of /opt/qt4 and removed from > config and refreshed the linker cache). I haven't gotten into the meat > of it yet, but if this is any indication of the quality of the cmake > build system, I'm thinking I might actually like this beast, just a > little learning curve to deal with. Yea, it's quite flexible, if not annoying at times ;) > > Going back to tqtinterface, couple of things I didn't understand. First > is that the release version is defined (MAJOR,MINOR,MICRO) as 3.5.12, > but the soname of the library is 4.2.0. Second, I see the qt4 > directories...are these required for later? I was moving on and building > deps for arts, but I haven't actually went beyond tqtinterface yet as I > don't want to get too far in and then have to start over (not that it is > really a big deal). > There's work on porting tqtinterface to qt4, and that's heavily under development. (Apparently a lot of Qt3 functions don't exist in Qt4, so that's why this exists in the first place) Not required for now, and probably not anytime soon. > http://trinity.pearsoncomputing.net/wiki/bin/view/Developers/HowToBuild > > No mention is made of QT4 other than tqtinterface providing the > 'groundwork' (or intermediary step as I understood it) for migrating to > QT4. Several other examples are provided that highlight dependency > differences from the latest official KDE release, so I'm not convinced > by that document that QT4 is required yet. The fact that tqtinterface > builds without QT4 seems to provide further evidence that it is not > required. Since it really is not a big deal, I'm going to crash tonight, > and push forward tomorrow without QT4 unless you know for certain that > my observations are incorrect. > Yea, push forward without Qt4 for now. It's not needed. And tqtinterface practically provides all the functions for drawing the DE and WM in Qt3 and Qt4. > Finally, I ask your opinion on provided packages. Barring the additional > bindings, do any other packages need to be exported beyond koffice and > k3b (already in the book) in order to to provide a fairly complete > desktop environment? No. After kdebase, it's up to the user on how to proceed. If they want admin tools, games, etc... Then they can add them. (I think I might have an ugly hack to force autoconf, since there's no cmake for those yet) > > -- DJ Lucas > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content, and is believed to be clean. > > -- > http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev > FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html > Unsubscribe: See the above information page > -- later, Robert Xu -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
