On Fri, 9 Jun 2000, Matthew R. Sprague wrote:
> Does one need to uninstall older KDE2 rpm's such as 20000531 before installing
> the new one's or is it ok to just rpm -i over the older ones? Keep in mind
> that I want to be able to use both KDE1 and KDE2. Using rpm -u will remove
> KDE1 packages? There is a problem with removing your KDE2 rpm's (on Mandrake
> anyway). Using rpm -e yields the package not installed error and rpm -i yields
> package is allready installed. Which is it; installed or not installed?
I always do a rpm -Uvh (update) over the old ones. Or better yet, DELETE
the /opt/kde2 directory. This is only an issue if you are using the RPM's
out of the ~molnarc directory. If using the ones in Cooker you will be
able to udpate. Read the README in my directory. It tells you that I do
not recommend these rpm's, I recommend the .tar.gz files.
>
> What differences exist between your rpm's on
> http://us.mandrakesoft.com/~molnarc/index.html and those in Mandrake cooker
> contributions? Are the rpm's on us.mandrake using /usr/lib/qt2 or
> /usr/lib/qt2.1.1? This is also an issue that needs to be addressed. Why is
> Mandrake using qt2 and Redhat qt2.1.1.? This is a classic example of the need
> for the LSB. This is a real pain in the ass from the end user standpoint.
>
The dif is mainly in the spec files. The ones in my personal directory are
usually more current snapshots. I do not upload to Cooker unless I know
they are working and there is an improvement for the users.
As all my releases say they are NOT official KDE releases. (Actually there
is really no such thing as a packaged official KDE release as all
packagers make a few adjustments). The releases I put into the ~molnarc
directory have NO adjustments for systems or distributions. The ones on
Cooker are more specific to Mandrake.
As far as qt goes...... The current version in cooker is qt2.1.1
(qt2-2.1.1). I really am not sure waht you are talking about here. I
upgraded cooker to qt2-2.1.1 the day after it was available from the
trolls. I don't think anyone can ask much more.
The reason we use qt2-2.1.0 and qt2-2.1.1 rather than just qt2.1.1 is it
is a binary compatable version. The other reason was is that I do not want
2 versions of qt2 hanging around someones desktop. Another reason is we
want qt1 and qt2 to be able to live on the same machine.
> If the above comments seemed harsh or critical I'm very sorry. Let me take
> this opportunity to also compliment the entire KDE team for producing such
> wonderful software.
>
Remember the KDE team has nothing to do with any of the software packaging
that I talk about above. The KDE team writes the code and makes it
availablt to us packagers.
When people are critical usually it makes it better and makes us think, so
don't worry about that. However it does help when people are critical if
they include suggestions for improvement. Remember, just because RedHat
does things in a certain way it is not always right.
