Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 16022 - kdebase file conflicts
Summary: kdebase file conflicts
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: [OLD] KDE (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: High minor
Assignee: Gentoo KDE team
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2003-02-19 14:39 UTC by Dan Armak (RETIRED)
Modified: 2005-02-08 02:24 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Dan Armak (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2003-02-19 14:39:43 UTC
Noting this so I don't forget: 
 
- Every 3.x (and cvs) kdebase package installs the same /etc/pam.d/kde. It should therefore move 
to an independant package on which kdebase would depend. 
 
- Every 3.x kdebase (starting wth some revision) makes the $KDEDIR/share/apps/kdesktop/pics/ 
directory a symlink to /usr/share/pixmaps. This allows kde to see the gnome icons while installing its 
own as well (the gnome icons' filenames are all prefixed with 'gnome-' so there's no danger of 
conflicts.) 
However that means all the 3.x kdebases put the same files in /usr/share/pixmaps and happily 
overwrite one another. So this needs a separate single package too - except that different kde 
versions have different iconsets. Arg. 
These icons include the kde splash screen, so we can't mix versions here. Arg again. This needs to 
be looked at...
Comment 1 Dan Armak (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2003-04-23 10:25:53 UTC
For item 1: maybe we're better off installing /etc/pam.d/kde-$ver files and telling the kdebase 
configure to use those files? In case in the future we might want differemnt KDEs to have 
different pam.d files. Is that likely to happen? 
 
For item 2: does current kde cvs change anything about that? Do freedesktop.org standards 
some into play? Will kde look in /usr/share/pixnaps without that symlink as well? 
 
Other kde ppl, please comment... 
Comment 2 Paul de Vrieze (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2003-04-23 14:48:32 UTC
I think having just one pam file used by all ebuilds is maybe a better solution. In most cases having just one kde pam file is better. Users that prefer it otherwise could be served by a use flag, or by manual intervention

About the artwork. If it is necessary to install in that shared dir I think it might be best to split those icons out into their own kde-icons package, and have the kde depend on a version bigger than itself. (Assuming no icons will be removed) What do the kde people themselves think about this anyway?
Comment 3 Caleb Tennis (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2003-04-24 08:26:35 UTC
#1 - I agree with Paul 
 
#2 - A possible solution (though perhaps not the best): pics get installed into version based 
subdirs (/usr/share/pixmaps/3.0, usr/share/pixmaps/3.1, etc). 
 
At kde startup time, we softlink all pics in /3.0 (if that's the version starting) back into 
/usr/share/pixmaps.  If later 3.1 starts, then all of those pics get softlinked back into 
/usr/share/pixmaps. 
 
Perhaps we also keep track of the last kde version started, so we don't redundantly have to 
softlink back over and over again if the same version is starting multiple times in a row. 
 
 
Comment 4 Paul de Vrieze (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2003-04-24 09:43:42 UTC
That doesn't work for multiple users though, that use different kde versions.
Comment 5 Dan Armak (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2004-11-20 05:42:24 UTC
I agree with Paul. Caleb's #2 solution is unusable when several different versions of KDE run at the same time.

I'm for adding kdm-pam and kdesktop-pics packages. Goes along nicely with the split ebuilds ;-)

Objections?
Comment 6 Dan Armak (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2004-12-25 09:12:55 UTC
kdm, kscreensaver and kcheckpass all use pam files, and can use separate ones
(set at compile time). A single file is installed by default, but since this 
isn't a configuration issue, perhaps we should use three separate files
to allow users the greatest configurability?

Also, we could make them install and use files named foo-$PV instead of having
a separate kde-pam ebuild provide a single file. Very very few people would need
this, but it isn't any more difficult to do for us. It does clutter pam.d
somewhat.
Comment 7 Dan Armak (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2005-01-11 12:27:22 UTC
Split ebuilds for beta1 now have a kdebase-pam package (that installs 
files with unversioned filenames).
Comment 8 Gregorio Guidi (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2005-01-17 09:38:00 UTC
I was going to switch kde-base/kdebase-3.4 to depend on kdebase-pam, too, but
for this bug to be resolved, shouldn't kdebase-pam be unversioned and unslotted?
Comment 9 Dan Armak (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2005-02-03 07:55:44 UTC
Yes, unless we want to allow people to maintain separate pam configurations
for different KDE versions. I'm not really into pam, so I can't present a
scenario where that'd be necessary. So I don't mind not allowing this. And we
can always add it later.

Yes, the current ebuild should be unversioned and unslotted. I'm changing its
slot to 0 and its version number to 4 to get people to upgrade, and adding an
appropriate slotmove instruction to the updates file. If that's ok with you,
please use it from the kdebase ebuild.
Comment 10 Gregorio Guidi (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2005-02-04 08:31:14 UTC
Excellent. Do you think we can remove kdebase-pam from package.mask to use
it for the next revision of kdebase-3.3.2?
Comment 11 Dan Armak (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2005-02-04 08:34:41 UTC
OK with me.
Comment 12 Gregorio Guidi (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2005-02-08 02:24:34 UTC
Everything is fine now. We have kdebase-pam used by 3.3 and 3.4, and 3.4 does
not use /usr/share/pixmaps anymore. Closing.