On February 16, 2004 10:34, Robert Tilley wrote: > I have to comment on the seemingly logical contradiction of KDE 3.2.0 > existing in the "stable" distribution while missing from the > "unstable" or "testing" branches. > > I will have to give the KDE Team minus points on this one. While we > all greatly appreciate the improvements in KDE 3.2, having to run > stable (with the corresponding lack of software) is an impediment. > -- > Comments are appreciated,
I am sympathetic to your point of view but cannot entirely agree. The main hold-up to getting 3.2 into unstable is getting 3.1.5 out of unstable. Remember that Debian requires that its packages work on eleven different architectures; something that (we) users of i386 sometimes overlook. I could not wait to try out KDE 3.2 and, in my eagerness, ended up breaking a Debian installation beyond my capacity to repair it. What did eventually work for me was to run KDE's new tool "Konstruct" which built a local KDE3.2 from source. Konstruct even breaks relatively gracefully: when it finds a missing dependency, you can install the package, type "make install" and it resumes where it left off. I now have a choice between KDE 3.2 and 3.1.5; needless to say, I spend nearly all my time in KDE 3.2
