On 07/22/2014 06:10 AM, Martin Gräßlin wrote: > On Tuesday 22 July 2014 05:28:36 Michael Palimaka wrote: >> On 07/18/2014 06:54 PM, Harald Sitter wrote: >>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 1:37 PM, Michael Palimaka <kensing...@gentoo.org> > wrote: >>>>> I just discused this with mgraesslin on IRC and he's fine with adding >>>>> a compatibility build flag to 4.x that makes it only install the >>>>> necessary libraries to avoid file conflicts with plasma-workspace 5. >>>>> >>>>> Does that sounds suitable for gentoo and if so, do you guys want to >>>>> come up with a patch? :) >>>> >>>> I'm very interested in this, but what did you have in mind - a collision >>>> is a collision, right? >>> >>> As far as I can tell the colliding bits are: >>> a) certain binaries/data/nonesense >>> b) all libfoo.so files >>> c) the include directories (assuming neither plasma5 nor kde-workspace >>> were put in an explicit subdir) >>> >>> So, to get the first collision out of the way kde-workspace needs a >>> flag to not build or install those bits (i.e. build in a library >>> compatibility mode). >>> >>> The latter two could be addressed by renaming the libraries in plasma5 >>> to libkworkspace5.so etc. and respective include directory names. What >>> I am not sure about here is whether there are more suitable >>> distro-level solutions to this. Surely libfoo.so (libfoo.so.0) and >>> libfoo.so (libfoo.so.1) conflicting cannot be a new issue, so I do >>> wonder how this would be resolved in general. >>> >>> HS >> >> I'm very interested in renaming libkworkspace in Plasma5 at a minimum. >> What do you suggest for the include directory - just kworkspace -> >> kworkspace5 or go further and make the whole thing KF5Workspace? >> >> I'm happy to provide patches, but didn't so far since there was >> resistance to the idea last time it was brought up. > > Personally I'm very reluctant to the idea of changing the includes. The risk > of us having to hunt down breakage for weeks is IMHO way too high for the > possible benefits. We just had it too often during the frameworks transition > that a header file got renamed, missed in one place and it starts to randomly > break to compile on some systems because a kde4 header is picked. Then we > easily waste huge amounts of work power on people trying to fix their build. > That's also the reason why I decided against renaming the headers for KWin.
That's fair enough, although I note the comparatively low number of consumers would limit the scope for breakage. I personally think it's worth the effort (and am willing to do the work) for certain items because, for example, I can't offer our users the ability to run KDE 4-based applications that depend on libkworkspace in a Plasma 5 environment. It would be nice if we could, but if we can't, we can't. _______________________________________________ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
