Re: KDE SC 4.10
On 21/04/13 00:04, Modestas Vainius wrote: There is a way to do this - backports. It is an official service as of wheezy. However, I see the main problem here - noone is interested in actually doing the necessary work and invest their days/weeks of time to make it reality. Debian developers typically use unstable while stable or testing is already good enough for less tech-savvy users or those who do not care about versions. Backporting a single package is one thing, backporting 100 tightly related source packages is another. And it's more than 100 times harder. Hi, I actually understand this. But theses are, IMO, choices made, rather than any restrictions in man power or tools available. Simply it should be just backports from the beginning, but there is more to it. There is a paradigm here, however I'm so far below the lowest rung of the debian hierarchy is that all I can do is somehow allude to people figuring it out for themselves. Because I know that saying Give up developing high level application packages for debians main release cycles and give them their own repos and/or release cycles won't get me far. Its a time cycle issue (speed). For example, user interactive applications gain features, fix bugs, create bugs etc. They develop differently. Critical System libraries and applications are more likely to require a need to remain stable and have less (if any) drastic changes to API's over a greater cycle. I care about a stable Operating System, I care much less about the 1000s of packages that run on top of it. To me debian is buried by it all (its the bane of most distros). In my spare time. I'm playing with some ideas on a build system, where, roughly, suites (e.g. system, gnu base, misc apps, gnome, KDE), including meta packages and sub packages - are all partitioned off. i.e. some_package's system dependency on version 2.14 for glibc does not exist in the stable release suite for system. This is not a build error, this is a failed package dependency attribute db entry. Just adding another dimension to the build process. I hope someone else does it before me so I can do other stuff. But I'm majorly enthusiastic about it. All the best for now. Jules. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5174e009.5090...@internode.on.net
Re: KDE SC 4.10
Hello, On Friday 19 April 2013 13:48:04 Julian wrote: Its a high level application that runs on, what rightly should be, a well tested lower (dependency) levels of a stable core (debian base). So it has a lot to be thankful for when it comes to stability *out of the box* or are you saying 4.10 doesn't just work?. KDE (in a broad extent) is just too big to just work without any effort. You probably have never tried to make it work and you have no idea what it takes and how much time it eats. If KDE was of a size of kcalc, I would agree with you. However, now it's 100 source packages and 2-3 times as many binary packages. On the architectural side, it is complicated (akonadi, nepomuk, mysql, virtuoso, phonon and other N number of daemons/framework/moving parts which have to 'play nice' and integrate together). You know whats really amazing? 4.10 just works better than 4.8. It still builds against qt 4.7 and works for me. If you managed to build it, you are in the power user group already so works for you is probably not the same as what works for Joe Average is. Of course everything I'm saying goes against the current philosophy of debian, there's only variants of one level, and its all in for stable. There is a way to do this - backports. It is an official service as of wheezy. However, I see the main problem here - noone is interested in actually doing the necessary work and invest their days/weeks of time to make it reality. Debian developers typically use unstable while stable or testing is already good enough for less tech-savvy users or those who do not care about versions. Backporting a single package is one thing, backporting 100 tightly related source packages is another. And it's more than 100 times harder. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: KDE SC 4.10
Hello, On 2013 m. of April 18 d., Thursday 04:04:01 Julian wrote: release cycle rigmarole even if obsolete by the time it comes out of freeze and is burned to 100's of blurays...no one wants 4.8 anymore. You know there are many people who do not care (or does not know) about version at all. All they care about is that stuff just works (tm). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201304181532.07531.mo...@debian.org
Re: KDE SC 4.10
* Modestas Vainius mo...@debian.org [18-04-2013 15:34 EEST]: On 2013 m. of April 18 d., Thursday 04:04:01 Julian wrote: release cycle rigmarole even if obsolete by the time it comes out of freeze and is burned to 100's of blurays...no one wants 4.8 anymore. People desperate for 4.10 are installing experimental, which is crazy, experimental is the crucible of package pain and will always be that way, but it is unnecessary for alot of applications out there, including KDE. I don't have a problem with cherry-picking what I want to use from experimental. Updating everything to the versions in experimental would be insane. You know there are many people who do not care (or does not know) about version at all. All they care about is that stuff just works (tm). Indeed, people like my wife couldn't care less. She knows I'm testing/using 4.10.2 on my PC but she's perfectly happy with her KDE 4.8 installation because it just works. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: KDE SC 4.10
On 18/04/13 22:32, Modestas Vainius wrote: Hello, On 2013 m. of April 18 d., Thursday 04:04:01 Julian wrote: release cycle rigmarole even if obsolete by the time it comes out of freeze and is burned to 100's of blurays...no one wants 4.8 anymore. You know there are many people who do not care (or does not know) about version at all. All they care about is that stuff just works (tm). *These* people don't care either way then? So its a moot point. And why wouldn't it just work? Its a high level application that runs on, what rightly should be, a well tested lower (dependency) levels of a stable core (debian base). So it has a lot to be thankful for when it comes to stability *out of the box* or are you saying 4.10 doesn't just work?. You know whats really amazing? 4.10 just works better than 4.8. It still builds against qt 4.7 and works for me. Of course everything I'm saying goes against the current philosophy of debian, there's only variants of one level, and its all in for stable. Regards. Jules. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5170be74.2080...@internode.on.net
Re: KDE SC 4.10
Hello! Julian wrote: Having a stable and tested operating system and its core packages is important and packages end up in stable that have gone through the rigmarole. I fully agree! Rolling releases of individual packages are everywhere (downloadable .deb packages or little source repos), most of the time (all the time?) these are not critical core OS libraries or applications. I would not forget backports as rolling release for stable. I am looking forward to wheezy lifetime if backports are more used when they are directly in main archive. best regards Markus -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/kkmjli$9us$1...@news.albasani.net
Re: KDE SC 4.10
On 18/04/13 02:46, Markus Raab wrote: Hello! Julian wrote: Having a stable and tested operating system and its core packages is important and packages end up in stable that have gone through the rigmarole. I fully agree! Rolling releases of individual packages are everywhere (downloadable .deb packages or little source repos), most of the time (all the time?) these are not critical core OS libraries or applications. I would not forget backports as rolling release for stable. I am looking forward to wheezy lifetime if backports are more used when they are directly in main archive. best regards Markus There's no wheezy backports until its release, or thats the process afaik. Something more KDE focused. I do understand that fragmenting releases can create problems on its own. But I can't see a problem if packages are strictly allocated officially by debian. -t wheezy-kde works for me, but I can't see why a structure such as /debian-rolling-release-kde wheezy main wouldn't work either. People desperate for 4.10 are installing experimental, which is crazy, experimental is the crucible of package pain and will always be that way, but it is unnecessary for alot of applications out there, including KDE. I'd rather test application bugs than package dependency bugs in experimental. Thats mental. For example: At the highest level, the packaging process for the xorg packages should remain. Every level higher than that? Not important enough and KDE is just not important, don't let the size of it confuse you, its really not important. It would be nice to see debian sleek again and an end to the insanity of every package that exists on the planet must endure the release cycle rigmarole even if obsolete by the time it comes out of freeze and is burned to 100's of blurays...no one wants 4.8 anymore. Regards. Jules. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/516f4681.5010...@internode.on.net
Re: KDE SC 4.10
People desperate for 4.10 are installing experimental, which is crazy, experimental is the crucible of package pain and will always be that way, but it is unnecessary for alot of applications out there, including KDE. I'd rather test application bugs than package dependency bugs in experimental. Thats mental. I tried to install from experimental. I decided it was more pleasant to check the KDE packaging out from git and build my own against wheezy. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1538267.YU844oRI3e@myrada
Re: KDE SC 4.10
On 2013-04-07, Sune Vuorela nos...@vuorela.dk wrote: Feel free to contact me privately. But note that that you need to have a good personal backup strategy. Based on various feedback from the nice volunteers including Diane, Andreas, Martin, Marco, Edward and Michael, the package is now in experimental. Good luck! :) /Sune -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/slrnkmj42e.fhs.nos...@sshway.ssh.pusling.com
Re: KDE SC 4.10
Hi you are right, it's not upgrade from or to version in official debian, i forgot that. Just wanted to help with possible conflict, i didn't realise, that it won't affect users, who use official packages Libor *On Friday 12 April 2013 14:48:17 Sune Vuorela wrote:* * On 2013-04-12, Libor Klepáč libor.kle...@bcom.cz wrote:* * * * Hi* * * * Preparing to replace kleopatra 4:4.8.3-0r0 (using* * * * This is not a version we have been providing, so upgrading from it is on* * your own.* * * * .../kleopatra_4.10.2-0r4_amd64.deb) ...* * * * This is also not a package we have been providin so upgrading to it is* * on your own.* * * * you should be able to recover with repaeting the install a couple of* * times.* * * * /Sune*
Re: KDE SC 4.10
Hello, I have build kdepim 4.10.2 packages from git, everything looks fine (i was building previous version of kdepim from git too, so no migration here) there is one conflict, it shows during upgrade -- Preparing to replace kleopatra 4:4.8.3-0r0 (using .../kleopatra_4.10.2-0r4_amd64.deb) ... Unpacking replacement kleopatra ... dpkg: error processing /root/debs/./kdepim-4.10.2/kleopatra_4.10.2-0r4_amd64.deb (--unpack): trying to overwrite '/usr/lib/libkleopatraclientgui.so.0.3.0', which is also in package libkleopatraclientgui0 4:4.8.3-0r0 dpkg-deb: error: subprocess paste was killed by signal (Broken pipe) Errors were encountered while processing: /root/debs/./kdepim-4.10.2/kleopatra_4.10.2-0r4_amd64.deb --- With regards, Libor Dne Sunday 07 April 2013 19:50:57, Sune Vuorela napsal(a): On 2013-04-06, Diederik de Haas didi.deb...@cknow.org wrote: Sune said: the 'normal' experimental is where the action happens, but it happens currently dripwise and not as a big chunk, as it makes stuff easier for the developers. It includes prepearation for the modern kdepim. Is that the reason that if I want to do a full-upgrade, the 'solution' to the conflicts is to remove the kdepim apps? And will that be resolved once the modern kdepim (thanks!) is uploaded as well? Yes. and yes. I do have - completely untested - but allright-looking packages available - and if there is a couple of interested people with a good personal backup strategy, I don't mind sharing them a bit. Feel free to contact me privately. But note that that you need to have a good personal backup strategy. /Sune signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: KDE SC 4.10
On 2013-04-12, Libor Klepáč libor.kle...@bcom.cz wrote: Hi Preparing to replace kleopatra 4:4.8.3-0r0 (using This is not a version we have been providing, so upgrading from it is on your own. .../kleopatra_4.10.2-0r4_amd64.deb) ... This is also not a package we have been providin so upgrading to it is on your own. you should be able to recover with repaeting the install a couple of times. /Sune -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/slrnkmg7ll.fhs.nos...@sshway.ssh.pusling.com
Re: KDE SC 4.10
* Libor Klepáč libor.kle...@bcom.cz [12-04-2013 16:58 EEST]: Hello, I have build kdepim 4.10.2 packages from git, everything looks fine (i was building previous version of kdepim from git too, so no migration here) there is one conflict, it shows during upgrade -- Preparing to replace kleopatra 4:4.8.3-0r0 (using .../kleopatra_4.10.2-0r4_amd64.deb) ... Unpacking replacement kleopatra ... dpkg: error processing /root/debs/./kdepim-4.10.2/kleopatra_4.10.2-0r4_amd64.deb (--unpack): trying to overwrite '/usr/lib/libkleopatraclientgui.so.0.3.0', which is also in package libkleopatraclientgui0 4:4.8.3-0r0 dpkg-deb: error: subprocess paste was killed by signal (Broken pipe) Errors were encountered while processing: /root/debs/./kdepim-4.10.2/kleopatra_4.10.2-0r4_amd64.deb I had no issues upgrading from the official (experimental) and semi-official (experimental-snapshot from http://qt-kde.debian.net/) packages signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: KDE SC 4.10
On 2013-04-06, Diederik de Haas didi.deb...@cknow.org wrote: Sune said: the 'normal' experimental is where the action happens, but it happens currently dripwise and not as a big chunk, as it makes stuff easier for the developers. It includes prepearation for the modern kdepim. Is that the reason that if I want to do a full-upgrade, the 'solution' to the conflicts is to remove the kdepim apps? And will that be resolved once the modern kdepim (thanks!) is uploaded as well? Yes. and yes. I do have - completely untested - but allright-looking packages available - and if there is a couple of interested people with a good personal backup strategy, I don't mind sharing them a bit. Feel free to contact me privately. But note that that you need to have a good personal backup strategy. /Sune -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/slrnkm3jh5.fhs.nos...@sshway.ssh.pusling.com
Re: KDE SC 4.10
Am Friday 05 April 2013 schrieb Sune Vuorela: Actual upgrade issues, like file overlaps and such - you are most welcome to report those. But remember your backup. Hmm...I am hesitant to open a bug report here, because that seems so obvious that I am almost sure that I miss something. Does anybody see what I might miss? blackbox:~# apt-get install -t experimental amarok Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable distribution that some required packages have not yet been created or been moved out of Incoming. The following information may help to resolve the situation: The following packages have unmet dependencies: amarok : Depends: libavcodec-extra-53 (= 6:0.8.3-1~) but it is not going to be installed E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages. blackbox:~# apt-cache policy libavcodec-extra-53 libavcodec-extra-53: Installed: (none) Candidate: 6:0.8.6-1 Version table: 6:0.8.6-1 0 500 http://ftp-stud.fht-esslingen.de/debian/ wheezy/main i386 Packages 300 http://ftp-stud.fht-esslingen.de/debian/ sid/main i386 Packages 4:0.7.2.1+b1 0 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status blackbox:~# Thanks, Rainer -- Rainer Dorsch http://bokomoko.de/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201304060909.29171...@bokomoko.de
Re: KDE SC 4.10
Hello, On Friday 05 April 2013 08:42:54 Sune Vuorela wrote: On 2013-04-05, Martin Steigerwald mar...@lichtvoll.de wrote: What was the reason for qt-kde.debian.net then? From the page: Some people thinks experimental is hard. Other people dislike doing the copyright-documentation that is required for the official archive. And qt-kde.d.n also could allow people who isn't a DD/DM to put packages there. Well, qt-kde.d.n as distribution channel has probably outlived its purpose even if it can still be useful sometimes. The rest of the mail will be a bit OT for this list, however, in my opinion, users might still be interested what some of the challenges are with KDE packaging. Actually, these are the main things which turn (have turned) me off from KDE packaging these days. IMO, it is very complicated to maintain anything that is more like 5-10 highly coupled source packages in Debian. You have to spend so much time on internal development infrastructure (constantly) that little time (or motivation) remains to do actual packaging changes. And as far as I know, KDE approaches 100 source packages, so do the math (funtunately, the number of core packages is low). Especially, it is very expensive (in terms of both time and knowledge required) to start KDE packaging for the first time or resume work after longer time of inactivity. I wish there was some Continuous integration for KDE packaging which took the load of: * Package building and dependency management. * Package uploading to development repository for testing. * Automatted Lintian reports and other Q/A. * Any other repetitive, boring but useful tasks. experimental is not suitable for that because it's a distribution channel rather than a development one. Nowadays experimental latency is OK for distribution channel however it is very slow for development (anything more than 5-30 minutes is slow because time is expensive). Not to mention the fact that you don't want to distribute half baked packages for the sake of yourself and your users since you still need to test before distribution. Even for distribution alone (no testing), uploading 100 source packages needs way too much of mantime. Once you do this a couple of times, it is no fun at all. P.S. It may sound that monolithic KDE packages were better. Well, no. They were awful with respect to actual packaging tasks (where is all the fun) however development infrastructure was more manageable with fewer source packages (even if their size was a huge disadvantage and PITA). signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: KDE SC 4.10
On Saturday April 06, 2013 12:07:57 Modestas Vainius wrote: Hello, On Friday 05 April 2013 08:42:54 Sune Vuorela wrote: On 2013-04-05, Martin Steigerwald mar...@lichtvoll.de wrote: What was the reason for qt-kde.debian.net then? From the page: Some people thinks experimental is hard. Other people dislike doing the copyright-documentation that is required for the official archive. And qt-kde.d.n also could allow people who isn't a DD/DM to put packages there. Well, qt-kde.d.n as distribution channel has probably outlived its purpose even if it can still be useful sometimes. The rest of the mail will be a bit OT for this list, however, in my opinion, users might still be interested what some of the challenges are with KDE packaging. Actually, these are the main things which turn (have turned) me off from KDE packaging these days. IMO, it is very complicated to maintain anything that is more like 5-10 highly coupled source packages in Debian. You have to spend so much time on internal development infrastructure (constantly) that little time (or motivation) remains to do actual packaging changes. And as far as I know, KDE approaches 100 source packages, so do the math (funtunately, the number of core packages is low). Especially, it is very expensive (in terms of both time and knowledge required) to start KDE packaging for the first time or resume work after longer time of inactivity. I wish there was some Continuous integration for KDE packaging which took the load of: * Package building and dependency management. * Package uploading to development repository for testing. * Automatted Lintian reports and other Q/A. * Any other repetitive, boring but useful tasks. Isn't this essentially what Kubuntu's Project Neon is (perhaps was, I'm not sure)? It means packaging git trunk rather than just tarballs, but that is probably a good thing. Sincerely, Beojan Stanislaus -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/2429543.tSDs9EFahx@quee2769
Re: KDE SC 4.10
Hello, On Saturday 06 April 2013 12:51:13 Beojan Stanislaus wrote: I wish there was some Continuous integration for KDE packaging which took the load of: * Package building and dependency management. * Package uploading to development repository for testing. * Automatted Lintian reports and other Q/A. * Any other repetitive, boring but useful tasks. Isn't this essentially what Kubuntu's Project Neon is (perhaps was, I'm not sure)? It means packaging git trunk rather than just tarballs, but that is probably a good thing. Sincerely, Project Neon is about distribution of the latest software completely disregarding quality of packaging and other issues (packages are purposively dumbbed down). So in the end Project Neon has basically nothing to do with quality packaging. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: KDE SC 4.10
Sune said: the 'normal' experimental is where the action happens, but it happens currently dripwise and not as a big chunk, as it makes stuff easier for the developers. It includes prepearation for the modern kdepim. Is that the reason that if I want to do a full-upgrade, the 'solution' to the conflicts is to remove the kdepim apps? And will that be resolved once the modern kdepim (thanks!) is uploaded as well? Btw I still get the upgrade issue I mentioned earlier, so I've now put kde- runtime(-data) on hold. Is that because not all packages are uploaded and/or I don't want to remove kontact or is there something broken on my system? If so, hints pointing in the right direction is much appreciated. Cheers, Diederik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201304062254.59884.didi.deb...@cknow.org
Re: KDE SC 4.10
On 07/04/13 06:54, Diederik de Haas wrote: Sune said: the 'normal' experimental is where the action happens, but it happens currently dripwise and not as a big chunk, as it makes stuff easier for the developers. It includes prepearation for the modern kdepim. Is that the reason that if I want to do a full-upgrade, the 'solution' to the conflicts is to remove the kdepim apps? And will that be resolved once the modern kdepim (thanks!) is uploaded as well? Btw I still get the upgrade issue I mentioned earlier, so I've now put kde- runtime(-data) on hold. Is that because not all packages are uploaded and/or I don't want to remove kontact or is there something broken on my system? If so, hints pointing in the right direction is much appreciated. Cheers, Diederik Theres really no point to installing experimental packages to begin with, let alone unstable. But I guess people are desperate for 4.10 and I do sympathize. Just thought I'd mention that. These are after all: ...a series of monthly stabilization updates to the 4.10 series. Its really obvious that debian in its present state can't work with that. However KDE fell way behind even when there was no freeze going on. A rolling release repo dedicated to packages available for debian stable and/or testing is what some people do behind the scenes impatient on waiting for an official distro package. I have this for a few packages, heres an example of a public one: deb http://apt.postgresql.org/pub/repos/apt/ wheezy-pgdg main This is official enough for me. Theres a bigger issue here that I wont bother with ATM. But this is a solution I support for non core lower level OS *longer shelf life* critical libraries and applications that are better candidates for the rigmarole of debian release cycle (perhaps a *hint* to the bigger issue). Regards, Jules. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5160bf02.2070...@internode.on.net
Re: KDE SC 4.10
On 04/04/13 21:54, David Baron wrote: I agree. I have two (count 'em) experimental snapshot sets of KDE, the KDE4.9 on qt-kde.debian.net/debian and now the 4.10 on packages.siduction.org/kdenext. This is certainly not desirable and probably, the 4.10 shouild be copied or moved to the debian snapshots. Once 4.10 is installed, it is not possible to go back so no need for both. Were the servers down at qt-kde.debian.net? Sorry I'm just confused as to why 4.10 isn't there? siduction is not something that I'll install as an complete OS for now, rolling release distributions aren't as important as you think, but IMO serve a different purpose. Having a stable and tested operating system and its core packages is important and packages end up in stable that have gone through the rigmarole. Rolling releases of individual packages are everywhere (downloadable .deb packages or little source repos), most of the time (all the time?) these are not critical core OS libraries or applications. But there was nothing like this for KDE unless you built your own and didn't give a damn about that oh so very important package six versions down (that I won't mention DIE ** DIE), you were stuck. So for that siduction is doing a great service to the community. May their rolling releases end up in experimental I can only see benefits. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/515e8046.3050...@internode.on.net
Re: KDE SC 4.10
On 2013-04-05, Julian temp...@internode.on.net wrote: Were the servers down at qt-kde.debian.net? Sorry I'm just confused as to why 4.10 isn't there? pushing things to qt-kde.debian.net is quite some extra work for everybody, for example it is not hooked up to debian autobuilder infrastructure, so it is basicalyl doubling the work if the work is planned to end up in the real debian archive. personally, I also think that qt-kde.debian.net isn't a good solution to any problem. Stuff should in my opinion happen in the debian archive. Oh. and it is me who has pushed most stuff to the archive so far. /Sune -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/slrnklt0r9.me.nos...@sshway.ssh.pusling.com
Re: KDE SC 4.10
Am Freitag, 5. April 2013 schrieb Sune Vuorela: On 2013-04-05, Julian temp...@internode.on.net wrote: Were the servers down at qt-kde.debian.net? Sorry I'm just confused as to why 4.10 isn't there? pushing things to qt-kde.debian.net is quite some extra work for everybody, for example it is not hooked up to debian autobuilder infrastructure, so it is basicalyl doubling the work if the work is planned to end up in the real debian archive. personally, I also think that qt-kde.debian.net isn't a good solution to any problem. Stuff should in my opinion happen in the debian archive. Oh. and it is me who has pushed most stuff to the archive so far. What was the reason for qt-kde.debian.net then? From the page: The primary purpose of this repository is to provide package versions of the KDE applications which for some reason cannot be uploaded to unstable or experimental. So a goal can be to have experimental always be ready to accept new KDE SC packages? At what times wasn´t it? Does it have to do with the freeze? I always thought the freeze would only affect sid. Well but then this discussion is out of scope here on the list, since it basically is a users mailing list. I continue looking forward to KDE SC 4.10 for Debian via official means. Thanks, -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201304051034.34736.mar...@lichtvoll.de
Re: KDE SC 4.10
On 2013-04-05, Martin Steigerwald mar...@lichtvoll.de wrote: What was the reason for qt-kde.debian.net then? From the page: Some people thinks experimental is hard. Other people dislike doing the copyright-documentation that is required for the official archive. And qt-kde.d.n also could allow people who isn't a DD/DM to put packages there. I think 1) is bogus. But note that experimental is also sometimes used for stuff that is *experimental*. 2) is just a way to delay work that anyways needs to be done. so just get it done. and 3) I just think is a bad idea. So a goal can be to have experimental always be ready to accept new KDE SC packages? At what times wasn?t it? Does it have to do with the freeze? I always thought the freeze would only affect sid. It is completely unrelated to the freeze. Well but then this discussion is out of scope here on the list, since it basically is a users mailing list. Ack. Oh. and note that what's in experimental now is still considered experimental. so ensure you have backups ready if you install it. And it is definately not ready for bug reports like 'you miss foo'. Actual upgrade issues, like file overlaps and such - you are most welcome to report those. But remember your backup. And finally, if any newcomer wants to help on easy tasks (there is lots of easy packages left), please contact me. /Sune -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/slrnklt3ki.me.nos...@sshway.ssh.pusling.com
Re: KDE SC 4.10
The upgrade fails on my system, each time with kde-runtime-data. Details: # aptitude safe-upgrade Resolving dependencies... The following packages will be upgraded: kde-runtime-data The following partially installed packages will be configured: dolphin kate kde-baseapps kde-baseapps-bin kde-plasma-desktop kde-runtime kdebase-apps kdebase-bin kdepasswd kfind klipper kmenuedit konq-plugins konqueror konqueror-nsplugins kwrite libkateinterfaces4 1 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 57 not upgraded. Need to get 0 B/6,018 kB of archives. After unpacking 1,144 kB will be used. Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?] Retrieving bug reports... Done Parsing Found/Fixed information... Done Reading changelogs... Done (Reading database ... 157908 files and directories currently installed.) Preparing to replace kde-runtime-data 4:4.9.5-0r1 (using .../kde-runtime- data_4%3a4.10.2-1_all.deb) ... Unpacking replacement kde-runtime-data ... dpkg: error processing /var/cache/apt/archives/kde-runtime- data_4%3a4.10.2-1_all.deb (--unpack): trying to overwrite '/usr/share/man/man1/plasmapkg.1.gz', which is also in package kde-workspace-bin 4:4.9.5-0r5 Processing triggers for desktop-file-utils ... Processing triggers for man-db ... Errors were encountered while processing: /var/cache/apt/archives/kde-runtime-data_4%3a4.10.2-1_all.deb E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) A package failed to install. Trying to recover: dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of kde-runtime: kde-runtime depends on kde-runtime-data (= 4:4.10.2-1); however: Version of kde-runtime-data on system is 4:4.9.5-0r1. ... whole bunch of similar dpkg errors follows ... A full-upgrade basically wants to remove kde-pim apps, so didn't continue. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201304040821.39371.didi.deb...@cknow.org
Re: KDE SC 4.10
On Thursday 04 April 2013 08:21:39 Diederik de Haas wrote: The upgrade fails on my system, each time with kde-runtime-data. Please disregard my previous msg, since I was upgrading from the 'normal' experimental. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201304040831.00906.didi.deb...@cknow.org
Re: KDE SC 4.10
On Thursday, 04 April, 2013 02:08:00 AM José Manuel Santamaría Lema wrote: David Baron d_ba...@012.net.il Up and running, quite nicely My wife's desktop came up, no problem. Mine crashed plasma-desktop. Had to start over, new .kde. Found problem was actually the yaWP weather plasmoid. When I put that back, crashed, so had to do some surgery on plasma-desktop-appletrc to get rid of it. I have updated the KDE packages to 4.10.2 and plasma-widget-yawp to 0.4.5 rebuilt against 4.8. Do you still have the same problem? Question is are the appropriate dev packages up-to-date? I rebuilt 0.4.5 and still crashed. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201304040932.04253.d_ba...@012.net.il
Re: KDE SC 4.10
On 2013-04-04, Diederik de Haas didi.deb...@cknow.org wrote: On Thursday 04 April 2013 08:21:39 Diederik de Haas wrote: The upgrade fails on my system, each time with kde-runtime-data. Please disregard my previous msg, since I was upgrading from the 'normal' experimental. the 'normal' experimental is where the action happens, but it happens currently dripwise and not as a big chunk, as it makes stuff easier for the developers. It includes prepearation for the modern kdepim. /Sune -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/slrnklqe56.me.nos...@sshway.ssh.pusling.com
Re: KDE SC 4.10
On Thursday, 04 April, 2013 09:32:04 AM David Baron wrote: On Thursday, 04 April, 2013 02:08:00 AM José Manuel Santamaría Lema wrote: David Baron d_ba...@012.net.il Up and running, quite nicely My wife's desktop came up, no problem. Mine crashed plasma-desktop. Had to start over, new .kde. Found problem was actually the yaWP weather plasmoid. When I put that back, crashed, so had to do some surgery on plasma-desktop-appletrc to get rid of it. I have updated the KDE packages to 4.10.2 and plasma-widget-yawp to 0.4.5 rebuilt against 4.8. Do you still have the same problem? Question is are the appropriate dev packages up-to-date? I rebuilt 0.4.5 and still crashed. All siduction pakages upgraded today, saw -dev packages there as well. Rebuild yaWP 0.4.5 Still crashes. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201304041142.53067.d_ba...@012.net.il
Re: KDE SC 4.10
On 2013-04-04, David Baron d_ba...@012.net.il wrote: All siduction pakages upgraded today, saw -dev packages there as well. Please take siduction support off this list. /Sune -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/slrnklqg6q.me.nos...@sshway.ssh.pusling.com
Re: KDE SC 4.10
Am Dienstag, 2. April 2013 schrieb José Manuel Santamaría Lema: Hello Marin, Hi José, Hi! I have browsed some basic packages at git.debian.org and it seems José and others work on KDE SC 4.10. Are any of these already in a testable state? I may be inclined to build some during the free week after the coming week. Anyway, keep up the good work. Thanks, I have switched to siduction[1], this means I will be working providing packages for that project from now on. The packages of debian's git are almost ready but they probably need some few changes (some Breaks/Replaces here and there), I have hacked them a bit and I released them for siduction, While this packages are meant to be included in that distro, I tried to install them in a debian machine and they work, you José, thank you. I am reluctant about switching (partly) to a Debian derivative. I didn´t switch to Ubuntu and seeing the recent stuff happening there I now know why. And while I think end of freeze period times in Debian are sometimes difficult to deal with I am also a bit tired of the ton of Debian derivatives, their renames, closings and reopenings somewhere else and so on and would like a rolling Debian instead :). Debian is a constant for me, it has always been there, since I use it. It may not have been the best in all cases, but at last its still there and rocking. And anyway, there is a way to provide rolling KDE SC in qt-kde.debian.net or wasn´t there? Also I don´t like to ask for feedback regarding any possible installation of your packages on this list, cause, well, the list is called debian-kde not siduction-kde :) [1] It's a rolling release based on debian sid, so no freezes because they are not needed. Thanks, -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201304041244.08686.mar...@lichtvoll.de
Re: KDE SC 4.10
On Thursday, 04 April, 2013 01:44:08 PM Martin Steigerwald wrote: Am Dienstag, 2. April 2013 schrieb José Manuel Santamaría Lema: Hello Marin, Hi José, Hi! I have browsed some basic packages at git.debian.org and it seems José and others work on KDE SC 4.10. Are any of these already in a testable state? I may be inclined to build some during the free week after the coming week. Anyway, keep up the good work. Thanks, I have switched to siduction[1], this means I will be working providing packages for that project from now on. The packages of debian's git are almost ready but they probably need some few changes (some Breaks/Replaces here and there), I have hacked them a bit and I released them for siduction, While this packages are meant to be included in that distro, I tried to install them in a debian machine and they work, you José, thank you. I am reluctant about switching (partly) to a Debian derivative. I didn´t switch to Ubuntu and seeing the recent stuff happening there I now know why. And while I think end of freeze period times in Debian are sometimes difficult to deal with I am also a bit tired of the ton of Debian derivatives, their renames, closings and reopenings somewhere else and so on and would like a rolling Debian instead :). Debian is a constant for me, it has always been there, since I use it. It may not have been the best in all cases, but at last its still there and rocking. And anyway, there is a way to provide rolling KDE SC in qt-kde.debian.net or wasn´t there? Also I don´t like to ask for feedback regarding any possible installation of your packages on this list, cause, well, the list is called debian-kde not siduction-kde :) [1] It's a rolling release based on debian sid, so no freezes because they are not needed. I agree. I have two (count 'em) experimental snapshot sets of KDE, the KDE4.9 on qt-kde.debian.net/debian and now the 4.10 on packages.siduction.org/kdenext. This is certainly not desirable and probably, the 4.10 shouild be copied or moved to the debian snapshots. Once 4.10 is installed, it is not possible to go back so no need for both. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201304041354.01775.d_ba...@012.net.il
Re: KDE SC 4.10
Up and running, quite nicely My wife's desktop came up, no problem. Mine crashed plasma-desktop. Had to start over, new .kde. Found problem was actually the yaWP weather plasmoid. When I put that back, crashed, so had to do some surgery on plasma-desktop-appletrc to get rid of it. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/0mkp00m9o1wuw...@a-mtaout20.012.net.il
Re: KDE SC 4.10
David Baron d_ba...@012.net.il Up and running, quite nicely My wife's desktop came up, no problem. Mine crashed plasma-desktop. Had to start over, new .kde. Found problem was actually the yaWP weather plasmoid. When I put that back, crashed, so had to do some surgery on plasma-desktop-appletrc to get rid of it. I have updated the KDE packages to 4.10.2 and plasma-widget-yawp to 0.4.5 rebuilt against 4.8. Do you still have the same problem? signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: KDE SC 4.10
José Manuel Santamaría Lema panfa...@gmail.com rebuilt against 4.8 ugh, I meant rebuilt against KDE workspaces 4.10. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: KDE SC 4.10
Hello Marin, Martin Steigerwald mar...@lichtvoll.de Hi! I have browsed some basic packages at git.debian.org and it seems José and others work on KDE SC 4.10. Are any of these already in a testable state? I may be inclined to build some during the free week after the coming week. Anyway, keep up the good work. Thanks, I have switched to siduction[1], this means I will be working providing packages for that project from now on. The packages of debian's git are almost ready but they probably need some few changes (some Breaks/Replaces here and there), I have hacked them a bit and I released them for siduction, While this packages are meant to be included in that distro, I tried to install them in a debian machine and they work, you can install them adding this line to your sources.list or sources.list.d/whatever: deb http://packages.siduction.org/kdenext experimental-snapshots and then you can install siduction-archive-keyring and upgrade. Pretty much as you did with qt-kde.debian.net. Hint: don't upgrade with the X server running if you are upgrading from 4.9.5, we got some hangs. [1] It's a rolling release based on debian sid, so no freezes because they are not needed. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: KDE SC 4.10
José Manuel Santamaría Lema panfa...@gmail.com deb http://packages.siduction.org/kdenext experimental-snapshots Oops, I actually meant: deb http://packages.siduction.org/kdenext experimental-snapshots main -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201304020028.38192.panfa...@gmail.com
KDE SC 4.10
Hi! I have browsed some basic packages at git.debian.org and it seems José and others work on KDE SC 4.10. Are any of these already in a testable state? I may be inclined to build some during the free week after the coming week. Anyway, keep up the good work. Thanks, -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201303171601.32634.mar...@lichtvoll.de
