Regarding kpdf

Christophe Devriese oelewapperke at
Sat Jan 3 00:17:55 GMT 2004

On Thursday 01 January 2004 01:56, Scott Wheeler wrote:
> On Tuesday 30 December 2003 22:05, George Staikos wrote:
> >   I agree that it needs to be removed.  I have already asked for it
> > (along with other dead code) to be moved to kdenonbeta but I did not
> > receive a reply.
> For what it's worth I've had a lot of problems with it too.  It's difficult
> to get it to build on an older distro -- much less work.  There are a lot
> of code paths that aren't hit because of ifdef's that don't seem to have
> been tested much that cause problems if you're missing some of the soft
> dependencies.  I'd also prefer to see it moved back to kdenonbeta for 3.2
> and if it's in better shape in a few months discuss bringing it back for
> 3.3...
> -Scott

OTOH kpdf does not have any dependencies, so :
-> If you've got build problems, those are bugs, submit them
-> you can skip the other necessities for pdf viewing if you just include kpdf 
(ie you don't need a working ghostview install, and ghostview can be most 

Installing kpdf on a distro should be a whole lot simpler than installing 
kghostview, it is faster, smaller, leaner, and it doesn't require 

2 bugs were fixed last night, a few more in the last week, so work is 
defineately being done to get it bugfree by 3.2


More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list