On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 23:07, Volker Armin Hemmann<volkerar...@googlemail.com> wrote: > please explain me why this option is bad? > > I can give you examples why it is good: > -you can have multiple versions of kde installed (well, you could in the past, > until someone started to put crap into python's directories). > and
Its not that simple KDE wasn't designed to work like this, kdeprefix is a Gentoo Thing that is not supported by upstream. Multiple issues can arise when using kdeprefix, things not working, misc kde4 apps linking to wrong kde4 versions, etc. If you know what you're doing (and how to fix stuff when it breaks ;) kdeprefix can be useful. But its primarily meant for developers who want to test newer kde versions. Most users should stick to -kdeprefix which is widely tested and its upgrade path is cleaner and thoroughly checked before each release. > - it makes updates risk free. You go from X.Y.Z to X.Y.Z+1 or X.Y+1 - and > before you do so, you just copy the whole kde dir. In case of severe bugs (and > especially with kde 3 you always had some nasty bugs), you just copy the > directory back and can use kde in the hours portage needs to recompile stuff - > or in the minutes it needs to install from packages (well, split ebuilds > increased that time A LOT). imho its better to just keep binary packages of stuff you've installed. if your update fails and you need your system asap, you just emerge your binaries back in no time :) no cp'ing or other strange out-of-portage stuff -- Alex Alexander || wired Gentoo QT && KDE Herd Tester http://www.linuxized.com
