On Wed, 1 Feb 2012 16:16:14 +0100
"roman" <lists@...> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On Wed, February 1, 2012 14:14, E. Liddell wrote:
> > My understanding is that it would go under /usr . . . somewhere.
> > (ref: http://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/filesystem/index.html )
> > /usr/kde/3.5 is definitely not right, though--we probably want
> > /usr/tde/[version]
> > or /usr/trinity/[version], for consistency.
> Mhh i already gave a lecture on linux filesystem-layouts but i have no
> idea what would be the better solution fsfe-wise. Personally i tend to
> /usr/tde/[version].

The dev manual indicates that the Gentoo dev team considers the filesystem
standard as more of a guideline than an absolute, but since we both think
/usr/tde/[version] is good we might as well go with that.

> > QT4 actually spatters files all over the place, including locations like
> > /usr/bin
> > (I ran equery files qt-core while I was trying to find out where the moc
> > was . . .)
> Mhh my guess is we need to put qt3 in a seperate directory (or should be
> keep it in /usr/qt/3 ?) otherwise there will be tons of complications.

With the next version, we should be able to go to /usr/tqt, but moving to
there with 3.5.13 might be a bit premature.

> > I'll have a look--I do have cmake ebuilds for kdeartwork and most of
> > kdegraphics, although they need a bit of cleanup for mirror stuff.
> Not much in there yet, just the thirdpartymirrors and an empty
> documentation folder.

Okay, so the first step is to get tde-base, its dependancies, and the
eclasses (I think cmake only uses -functions and maybe qt3) in
there. Then ebuilds for the other stuff that's already been moved
to cmake. After that, we can look at the rest.
 
> > Another thing that needs to be looked at is package taxonomy--we
> > should consider replacing the kde-base and kde-misc categories with
> > trinity-base and trinity-misc or the like, although I'm not sure exactly
> > how adding whole categories works.  I'm also looking at changing the
> > names of the eclasses (kde-functions -> tde-functions or
> > trinity-functions,
> > etc.)
> Definitly! I would go with tde-* it's less typing.;) 

I'm a bit worried about it being too similar to kde-, though.  Doesn't matter
for the eclasses or directories, but for stuff end-users are going to have to
type on a regular basis, I'd like to be as distinct as possible.

>But i wouldn't want
> to change stuff like "konqueror" to "tonqueror" *g.

No, "tonqueror" would just be silly. :) We can probably use the same
filtration mechanism as kde-sunset and remove the various incarnations
of KDE from the path in the startup script.  Otherwise, we should do 
exactly as much renaming as the Trinity project itself, and no more.

> > I found the problem, actually:  QT4 installs its moc (and some other
> > stuff,
> > but I think it's the moc that's causing the breakage) to /usr/bin, which
> > is
> > normally going to come very early in the path.  Having each ebuild
> > temporarily
> > rearrange the path so that the QT3 dirs come before /usr/bin, and
> > therefore
> > the QT3 moc is used, might fix things.  The alternative would be patching
> > the make/cmake files to specify the moc by full path, but that's a lot
> > more
> > complicated (and might break under some circumstances).  I wish I knew
> > how kde-sunset deals with this . . .  I guess that's another thing to ask
> > on
> > gentoo-desktop.
> Yes, i think there is at least a cmake-option or variable in the eclass
> that specifies the moc-location or the kde-prefix to use.

I'm more worried about the non-cmake packages in that regard, but
they're screwed up anyway. Since no one on the trinity-dev list seems
interested in helping me sort out the linker problem that seems to exist
in half the packages, I may need to go to gentoo-dev for help, which is
something I'm not looking forward to. :(