Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: > The next step was to use a kdeprefix use flag[2]. This flag no longer > touches the SLOT that is set to "4" for all kde-4.X versions. It only > determines if the package will be installed under the FHS compliant > location (/usr) or under the old location (/usr/kde/<version>). This > however means the users will no longer have the option to have more than > one kde-4.X version installed. If that stops _all_ users from doing so, I'd vote against.
> I've been thinking on a different method. With this method [3], we would > keep using the <major>.<minor> slots (4.1, 4.2, etc) so we also wouldn't > break the invariancy. We would allow users to select whether to have an > FHS compliant install or not (the way to allow that still needs to be > discussed) and we would set the prefix based on that. In case the user > wants an FHS compliant install, the eclasses would block all kde > packages on other slots - except 3.5 (uses other eclasses) and the live > versions (for the above reason that it will always be installed under > /usr/kde/<live-version>). One way to decide whether to install on an FHS > compliant location would be to add a use flag, but I don't think adding > that flag for 200+ ebuilds makes sense as it doesn't make sense to have > 1 version of some packages and possibly 2 or more of other packages. > Perhaps FHS is more of a feature than a USE flag? It certainly could apply to other packages, and as you say adding and maintaining the USE flag to/for so many ebuilds is a bit of a pain. > So, what am I after in this email? After having an internal discussion > and then opening it up to users in #gentoo-kde and a few other people on > #gentoo-portage, it was suggested I sent a mail here to open this > discussion to everyone and to present the case in a more clear manner. > So, can anyone suggest a good way to accomplish what were trying to do? > At least a better solution than the ones I've presented above? Just a thought, but this sounds an awful lot like a prefix ebuild. Is there any relevance from grobian's work? Wrt to the blocks, it doesn't strike me that major iff the user has set FHS in FEATURES (or w/e the mechanism is) since in that case they will be on the "manage everything for me, for this install" track.
