The kde guide http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/kde-config.xml needs to mention that it is a good idea to enable gif support in the use variables. Otherwise gif images will not be shown which is not very usefull. Take a look at this picture if you do not believe me: http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/9699/snapshot1ue6.png Picture taken from: http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-494969-highlight-konqueror+images.html
Correction. It is of course qt that needs to be compiled with gif support and not konqueror (but the solution is the same: add gif to make.conf use variables)
Please reopen if you use a sane desktop profile and don't have "-*" in your USE flags.
My /etc/make.profile points to /usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/x86/2006.1/ I had just made a clean install when the problem occured. My /etc/make.conf use flags are: USE="X alsa bzip2 cdr dvd emacs gif gtk gtk2 kde kdeenablefinal mmx sse sse2 tetex truetype unicode qt -arts -doc -gnome -java -kde -mozilla -pcmcia -samba" So can they be more sane?
From the release announcement on the main page: "The most popular architectures now use GCC 4.1, glibc 2.4 and baselayout 1.12.1, as well as including a new profile layout, ***with separate desktop and server profiles.***" From the upgrading instructions [1]: "Please note that the alpha/2006.1, amd64/2006.1 and x86/2006.1 profiles are very minimal. They all have a desktop sub-profile that is likely what you want on a desktop machine." IOW, there was a change in the way the profiles are managed. Gentoo developers beleive it's a step in the right direction. Sorry for possible confusion. If you think we should announce this on yet another place, please let us know. [1] http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gentoo-upgrading.xml#doc_chap3 (BTW, USE="kde -kde" doesn't make much sense to me.)
Okay point taken, but the following guide needs to updated (the handbook): http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-amd64.xml?part=1&chap=6#doc_chap2 It does not mention the new desktop profile.
Valid point.
I disagree. In this particular case, unless you're doing something really unusual, there shouldn't be a need to switch from the default profile you'll get from the liveCD. More to the point, profile instructions really don't belong in the handbook; that's what the Gentoo Upgrade guide[1] is for. 2006.1 is being covered in that guide right now; it's almost completely updated. Please read that guide instead. Instead, I will edit the KDE guide to suggest switching to the /2006.1/desktop subprofile, if one exists for your architecture.
Fixed in CVS. Added a suggestion to switch to the new desktop subprofile in the KDE guide to take advantage of new default USE flags.
(In reply to comment #7) > I disagree. In this particular case, unless you're doing something really > unusual, there shouldn't be a need to switch from the default profile you'll > get from the liveCD. Quoting from the Handbook (same link as the OP used): [cut] lrwxrwxrwx 1 48 Apr 8 18:51 /etc/make.profile -> ../usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/x86/2006.1/ If you are using one of the aforementioned three architectures, the default profile will provide you with a Linux 2.6-based system. This is the recommended default, but you have the option of choosing another profile too. [/cut] So, keeping no longer valid instructions in the Handbook is wrong. > More to the point, profile instructions really don't belong in the handbook; > that's what the Gentoo Upgrade guide[1] is for. Nah, please don't nuke it. So, in short, Handbook still needs fixing as it recommends a 2006.1 profile. That's wrong.
(In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #7) > > I disagree. In this particular case, unless you're doing something really > > unusual, there shouldn't be a need to switch from the default profile you'll > > get from the liveCD. > > Quoting from the Handbook (same link as the OP used): > > [cut] > lrwxrwxrwx 1 48 Apr 8 18:51 /etc/make.profile -> > ../usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/x86/2006.1/ > > If you are using one of the aforementioned three architectures, the default > profile will provide you with a Linux 2.6-based system. This is the recommended > default, but you have the option of choosing another profile too. > [/cut] > > So, keeping no longer valid instructions in the Handbook is wrong. > > > More to the point, profile instructions really don't belong in the handbook; > > that's what the Gentoo Upgrade guide[1] is for. > > Nah, please don't nuke it. Agreed on one point, users should not have to read the upgrade after a fresh install to find out about various profiles. "<title>Choosing the Right Profile</title>" is where profiles are introduced to users (still not ARCH-clean btw) > So, in short, Handbook still needs fixing as it recommends a 2006.1 profile. > That's wrong. Nope, there is nothing wrong with the 2006.1 profile and it's still the recommended one. The basic profile is true to the spirit of Gentoo, minimal, users choose and add what they want. /server (basically apache & mysql only) is ruled out because of ewarn "This profile has not been tested thoroughly and is not considered to be" ewarn "a supported server profile at this time. For a supported server" ewarn "profile, please check the Hardened project (http://hardened.gentoo.org)." /desktop can be mentioned as long as it clearly states that it will pull in a ton of Krap & QrufT. Users who do want Kr^HDE might still not want arts and problably not gtk/gnome anyway
Created attachment 96623 [details, diff] hb-install-system.xml.patch How's this look? neysx, jkt, think this sufficiently addresses the problem without being too complex/unnecessary at this point in the installation process?
No objections to the nice patch above, so it went in. Fixed in CVS, thanks for everyone's contributions (and especially neysx's "Krap & QrufT", I'll have to remember that. :D)
