[kde-freebsd] ports/185488: [patch] net/kdenetwork4: add optional dependency on knemo

Max Brazhnikov makc at freebsd.org
Fri Jan 17 09:51:16 UTC 2014

On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 23:17:57 +0100 Adriaan de Groot wrote:
> On Tuesday 14 January 2014 11:20:01 Anton Sayetsky wrote:
> >  2014/1/13 Max Brazhnikov <makc at freebsd.org>:
> >  > I actually like the idea to inform users about other KDE applications,
> > but I > don't think bloating port dependencies is appropriate way to do it.
> > > How about pkg-message with list of ports for the most popular apps (we
> > can > take above-mentioned from KDE site)?
> >  
> >  > if you don't know about knemo, how would you know about kdeextragear4?
> >  
> >  I'll give you a single answer to above questions.
> >  I think that the best way is:
> >  1. Create meta-port for extragear (someone should find another
> >  extragear apps in ports tree).
> >  2. Add appropriate deps to it. (And remove duplicates from other kde*4
> > ports.) 3. Add kdeextragear4 dep to x11/kde4.
> That sounds like an excellent way to promote the Applications part of KDE -- 
> there's all the core / base stuff (what's known as the Software Collection 
> right now) and then there's a wide range of interesting apps that can be 
> considered part of the "extra's". You might know them by name, or, with this 
> suggestion, know that the "extragear" port contains a (longish) list of 
> suitable ports.
> But it'll take some setting up, yeah, and sorting out: is digikam an 
> extragear? How about tupi (well, that one's totally new still)?

We can create one meta port for extragear apps as KDE community defines it,
and second meta port for other third-party KDE applications.

> There's a thread on kde-community right now about reconsidering what all are 
> useful applications (e.g. kfloppy isn't, any more).

What is useful and what is not will be decided by users in the end.
btw, I never had a chance to use kfloppy :)


More information about the kde-freebsd mailing list