[arch-general] KDE4.3 Beta - Rocks, still a bit rough, but very usable as a primary desktop [SOLVED]

[David C. Rankin]

On Wednesday 17 June 2009 17:06:11 David Rosenstrauch wrote:
> David C. Rankin wrote:
> > (1) Not a production box, Arch install isolated on a spare raid
> > partition, all files (including Arch packages) backed up, nothing
> > critical at risk.
> >
> > (4) The downside if it all goes wrong -- pop the arch disk in the tray;
> > reboot
>
> OK, fair enough, then.  As long as you're aware of the potential
> consequences.
>
> > 	But, seriously, I'm not real sure pacman is thinking correctly on this
> > kde- unstable install. I don't have kde4 installed, but it looks like it
> > sure thinks I do.
>
> Actually, it sounds to me like you *do* have kde4 installed, but you
> don't think you do.
>
> > Take for example the conflicts listed just with regard to "kate".
> > (A standard package, not overly complex, but big enough to provide an
> > example) The conflicts in the attachment to keep the lines from
> > wrapping).
> >
> > 	All of the conflicts are of the form:
> >
> > application.h exists in both 'kdesdk-kate' and 'kdesdk'
>
> OK, so given that message:  kdesdk is the stock Arch KDE4 package.  I'm
> guessing that the kdesdk-* packages are the kde-unstable equivalent.  So
> pacman is saying:  dude, I can't install kdesdk-kate because its files
> already exist on disk (belonging to package kdesdk).  Solution?  First
> remove kdesdk (from stock Arch), then install kdesk-kate (from unstable).
>
> Or, more likely:
>
> pacman -Rs kde
> (remove all the stock Arch KDE packages that you already have installed)
>
> pacman -S kde
> (install all the KDE packages from unstable)
>
>
> So 'kdesdk-kate' and 'kdesdk' will not wind up both being installed on
> disk simultaneously.  They are from different repos (kde-unstable and
> extra, respectively), and conflict with each other.  And so one must be
> uninstalled before the other can be installed.
>
> Make sense?
>
> DR
>
> > 	Following the install, I tested with an update to see the result. The
> > first time it installed 15 or so packages and replaced whatever pacman
> > thought was
> >
> > kde4 with kde4-unstable:
> > :: Starting full system upgrade...
> > :: Replace kdeaccessibility with kde-unstable/kde-meta-kdeaccessibility?
> > :: [Y/n] Replace kdeadmin with kde-unstable/kde-meta-kdeadmin? [Y/n]
> > :: Replace kdeartwork with kde-unstable/kde-meta-kdeartwork? [Y/n]
> > :: Replace kdebase with kde-unstable/kde-meta-kdebase? [Y/n]
> > :: Replace kdebindings with kde-unstable/kde-meta-kdebindings? [Y/n]
> > :: Replace kdeedu with kde-unstable/kde-meta-kdeedu? [Y/n]
> > :: Replace kdegames with kde-unstable/kde-meta-kdegames? [Y/n]
> > :: Replace kdegraphics with kde-unstable/kde-meta-kdegraphics? [Y/n]
> > :: Replace kdemultimedia with kde-unstable/kde-meta-kdemultimedia? [Y/n]
> > :: Replace kdenetwork with kde-unstable/kde-meta-kdenetwork? [Y/n]
> > :: Replace kdepim with kde-unstable/kde-meta-kdepim? [Y/n]
> > :: Replace kdeplasma-addons with kde-unstable/kde-meta-kdeplasma-addons?
> > :: [Y/n] Replace kdesdk with kde-unstable/kde-meta-kdesdk? [Y/n]
> > :: Replace kdetoys with kde-unstable/kde-meta-kdetoys? [Y/n]
> > :: Replace kdeutils with kde-unstable/kde-meta-kdeutils? [Y/n]
> > :: Replace kdewebdev with kde-unstable/kde-meta-kdewebdev? [Y/n]
>
> Yes, exactly!  The kde-unstable packages replace the Arch stock packages.
>
> > 	Then running it again, all was well:
> >
> > [14:37 archangel:/etc/php] # pms -u
> >
> > :: Synchronizing package databases...
> >
> >  kdemod-legacy is up to date
> >  kde-unstable is up to date
> >  core is up to date
> >  extra is up to date
> >  community is up to date
> >  archlinuxfr is up to date
> >
> > :: Starting full system upgrade...
> >
> >  local database is up to date
> >
> > 	I'll keep an eye on it, but in working with it for a while, I think
> > we're good.
>
> OK, yeah.  Now that I see these 2 final pacman outputs (i.e., first
> where the unstable packages are replacing the stock ones, and then where
> pacman runs normally and installs nothing) it looks like you do in fact
> have things set up properly in pacman, though you came about it in a
> roundabout way.  So sounds like you won't have more trouble from here on.
>
> DR

OK,

	Let's go for 'Round 2'. I have an identical config on an i686 box, I've 
downloaded the kde-unstable files and now let's see if we can install kde-
unstable with resorting to force (same qualifications apply -- this is just a 
spare box with Arch on it that I can thrash if I need to)

	First I'll dump all the packages to my server before I delete kde and then 
roll the packages back in for the install (just in case pacman may want to 
delete them -- dunno, not going to take the chance). I'll start a new thread 
"kde-unstable install - Round 2" when I have the results of my first attempt. 
Thanks!


-- 
David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
Rankin Law Firm, PLLC
510 Ochiltree Street
Nacogdoches, Texas 75961
Telephone: (936) 715-9333
Facsimile: (936) 715-9339
www.rankinlawfirm.com