gene heskett posted on Tue, 12 Apr 2011 23:14:51 -0400 as excerpted:
> To Duncan: How were you building it?
>
> I haven't built kde from scratch in yonks, probably about 5 years.
Well, it wasn't really from scratch, but I've mentioned several times that
I run Gentoo, which is famous for being a scripted-build-from-sources
distribution.
To that there are both down-sides, such as taking several hours to build
each monthly kde4 update, the reason I often don't do it immediately at
release but wait a few days until I have a chance to deal with problems
that might come up in the process, and upsides, such as relatively easy
customization at a level binary distribution users can only DREAM about,
and the associated ability to be in far more direct control of your system
than binary distributions tend to (or in some cases, even have the ability
to) allow.
The fact that the builds are scripted in what amounts to extended bash,
makes for very easy further customizations, as well as easy patching, when
required, and unlike some distributions, gentoo actively encourages users
to do this sort of thing, altho there's a point at which "if you break it,
you get to keep the pieces" comes in.
Yet at the same time, the package managers (there's three to choose from,
the original and still default choice, python based, one originally based
on it but now largely rewritten, and a a third totally independent choice
written from scratch in C) have the usual dependency resolution based on
variables set in the build-scripts, called ebuilds, and do the usual
tracking of what's installed and can uninstall it, so it's far far easier
than tracking dependencies and managing packages manually, in either the
binary or from-source case, would be.
And there's levels of stability to choose from, as well. In the main
tree, there's the normal stable target archs and ~arch (arch being
replaced by for example, x86, amd64, ppc, etc, as appropriate), which
roughly compares to Debian testing. Then there's what's called
hard-masked, either by lack of arch keyword, or by listing in the masked
packages files. Hard-masked occurs at both ends of the spectrum, as
packages die and are ultimately removed due to obsolescence or security
issues, and with new packages that the maintainer doesn't yet believe
ready for even ~arch just yet. Finally, there's a whole list of project
(like gentoo/kde), developer and independent trees, called overlays,
together with a convenient app that simplifies managing and choosing them,
for those who don't find what they need in the main tree. Significant
overlays include kde-sunset (kde3), sunrise (developer inspected but user
contributed ebuild scripts for apps not in the main tree), x11 (testing
and "live-vcs" ebuilds for xorg, one of two overlays I use), kde (testing
and live-vcs version ebuilds for kde4, the other one I use), java, gnome,
embedded-crossdev, php, perl, rubi, science, xfce, mysql, multimedia,
qting-edge (qt4 experimental), dozens of developer and user overlays... A
gentoo user can mix and match overlays, with a priority mechanism
available to mediate should multiple overlays contain the same packages,
as desired. Again, these can be everything from personal overlays
containing minor tweaks to in-tree ebuilds as well as out-of-tree packages
the overlay owner found useful, to special-purpose overlays like the
embedded-crossdev overlay, to testing and live ebuild overlays like the
x11 and kde overlays I use, to legacy software overlays like the user-
managed kde-sunset.
For a dyed-in-the-wool customizer like myself, it's the perfect balance
between the usual binary distribution with all of its distribution-
arbitrary decisions, many of which are difficult to override, and
something like LFS (Linux from scratch), which allows all sorts of
customization, but at the cost of forcing one to track dependencies and
etc, pretty much manually.
FWIW, a lot of former Gentooers end up with Arch Linux, if they decide the
constant updating from sources is too much for them. It is, apparently,
the step about half way between an ordinary binary distribution and
gentoo's scripted from source, still allowing a lot of customization but
without the time-cost of from-source, much as gentoo is the step about
half way between an ordinary binary distribution, and LFS, lots of
customization potential but without the manual tracking hassles of LFS.
It's not for everyone, but for me, Gentoo's about as close to a perfect
match as I'd ever expect to see in the real world. =:^)
For you, honestly, I'd expect Gentoo's time cost to be more than you're
willing to pay, it certainly is for most, tho you could certainly surprise
me. I could see you doing something like Arch Linux, tho, if PCLinuxOS
fails to meet your needs at some point. I wouldn't find it entirely
surprising to see you becoming a Slacker, either, tho I'm not familiar
enough with them to know how they stack up in terms of kde age (I know
they're a kde distro, not gnome). Somehow, I don't have you pegged as the
Ubuntu type, however. =;^P
--
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
