On Fri, 24 May 2002 05:38:37 -0400 dep <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > begin Roger Oberholtzer's quote: > > | I only encounter them when doing an upgrade. All this really dumb > | confusion of /opt/kde vs. /opt/kde2, and $HOME/.kde vs. $HOME/.kde2 > | and $KDEDIR vs. $KDEDIRS and Desktop vs. Desktop2. This is a big > | part of what keeps screwing up the config files... > | > | In a kde2-only system, why are both needed? Is Caldera the only one > | that has both sets of things? > > no, suse does some stuff with them which defies rational explanation. > i suspect that part of the reason i've had great success with kde is > that i do not try to do things with multiple versions on the same > machine at the same time. that way lies madness. > > instead, i have three symlinks: /opt/kde, which points to whatever kde
I do this as well. What makes this tricky on Caldera is that they have an /opt/kde and an /opt/kde2. When installing a new KDE in, say, /opt/kde3, which should point at it: /opt/kde (of course not) or /opt/kde2 ? If you redirect the distro's /opt/kde2 to your /opt/kde3, what to do with /opt/kde? I usually just let it be. But I think it, along with the KDEDIR/KDEDIRS duality, is a source of problems. Many programs want to use KDEDIR, which is not pointing to the distro. Only KDEDIRS does. Resulting in configuration inconsistencies. > i'm using; /usr/lib/qt, which points to the qt appropriate to the kde > in use; and ~/.kde, which points to my kde configuration files. when > trying new versions, i change these symlinks to point to the new > stuff, with ~/.kde being a copy of my old configuration files. if > some application fails to work because of the guys didn't keep config > file backward compatibility, i nuke it and let it build a new one > which i then modify as needed. this way i can test new versions while > keeping the old version pristine such that i can return to it; when > the new version is stable, i switch entirely to it. (truth is, i've > never had to go back much and certainly never for long.) > > there are those who would rather employ the elaborate recipes that > purport to allow kde-1.x, kde-2.x, and kde-3.x stuff to run at once. > these are imho highly questionable. also, i doubt that they work > reliably. my brute-force method works every time. I go for the one at a time as well. I just think that it is harder to make it look like there is only one when there are two directories in /opt. -- +============================+===============================+ | Roger Oberholtzer | E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | OPQ Systems AB | WWW: http://www.opq.se/ | | Erik Dahlbergsgatan 41-43 | Phone: Int + 46 8 314223 | | 115 32 Stockholm | Mobile: Int + 46 733 621657 | | Sweden | Fax: Int + 46 8 302602 | +============================+===============================+ _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list - http://linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users Subscribe/Unsubscribe info, Archives,and Digests are located at the above URL.
