On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 11:16:15PM +0200, Rafael Sadowski wrote: > On Sat Apr 28, 2018 at 11:05:46PM +0300, Vadim Zhukov wrote: > > 2018-04-28 22:44 GMT+03:00 Rafael Sadowski <[email protected]>: > > > > > > On Thu Apr 26, 2018 at 10:43:14PM +0300, Vadim Zhukov wrote: > > >> 2018-04-26 21:58 GMT+03:00 Rafael Sadowski <[email protected]>: > > >> > Please find attached next new KDE4 replacement. > > >> > > > >> > Conflict bits are set: > > >> > > > >> > @conflict ktouch-<17.12.3 > > >> > @conflict kdebase-* > > >> > @pkgpath x11/kde4/ktouch > > >> > > > >> > $ cat x11/kde-applications/ktouch/pkg/DESCR > > >> > KTouch is a typing learning tool for KDE. > > >> > > > >> > It is a part of KDE Edu project. > > >> > > > >> > Ok? Commenst? > > >> > > >> Well, ktouch conflicts with ktouch by definition, so the first > > >> @conflict shouldn't be needed. :) > > > > > > That was exactly the idea of not allowing either. > > > > > > The question is: do we want to replace everything step by step but how > > > if we set conflict with kdebase-*. That doesn't make much sense to me. > > > Or do we want KDE4 || KDE5 Application? > > > > > > I think teh following is wrong: > > > > > >> > @conflict ktouch-<17.12.3 > > >> > @conflict kdebase-* > > >> > @pkgpath x11/kde4/ktouch > > > > > > Because "@pkgpath x11/kde4/*" is in conflict with "@conflict kdebase-*" > > > > > > I prefer it like now. x11/kde4 OR x11/kde-applications/*: > > > > > >> > @conflict ktouch-<17.12.3 > > >> > @conflict kdebase-* > > > > > > without pkgpath. > > > > > > I would be happy to hear the opinion of our pro porters!? > > > > I think you've got @conflict and @pkgpath wrong. > > > > The @conflict marks that you can't have both packages installed at the > > same time. The package by default conflicts with any other with same > > name, version and flavors are out of this check. > > > > The @pkgpath instead tells that given package should be "compatible" > > with another one, even with different name, in case of updating > > packages. > > > > So we have to have "@conflict kdebase-*" since both kdebase and ktouch > > packages contain same file(-s). And there is no point in having > > "@conflict ktouch-<17.12.3" since it's superseded by implicit default > > "@conflict ktouch-*". > > > > But "@pkgpath x11/kde4/ktouch" solves a totally different problem, > > allowing pkg_add not to complain when replacing KDE4's KTouch with > > KDE5 one. Note that @pkgpath kicks only when there's @conflict, either > > implicit or explicit. > > > > The appropriate @conflict+@pkgpat pair would mean not "you can't > > install this" but "you can upgrade to this". > > ACK; > > > > > Now to main question: do we want to have KDE Applications both from > > KDE4 and KDE5 worlds? They are almost equal at resources being used, > > but KDE4 isn't maintained upstream at all. And KF5-based apps > > perfectly work under KDE4 desktop and talk with KDE4 apps via, e.g., > > D-Bus. Yes, you'll have both Qt4 and Qt5 installed, as well quiet a > > few other libraries, until migration ends. Does such situation hurt > > anyone running modern desktop? > > > > My plan a long ago was getting rid of KDE4 as soon as KF5-based stuff > > comes in. Thus, x11/kde4/ktouch gets unlinked at the same time > > x11/kde-applications/ktouch is linked to build. But since I'm not > > doing the real work right now, it's not my right to take decisions > > here. > > I think you're right, and it's the best decision. Are there any > objections?
I support the replacement, no need for both versions, and it makes things simpler. > Btw I need an ok to import ktouch. ok
