Staying on KDE 4

Scimmia · 2015-02-25 07:55:51

Edited above before your last post.

Fincer · 2015-03-01 22:33:09

Well, I dag little deeper into my Arch system, and now I got rid of all qt5 packages, at least according to pacman. Successfully removed them all with extreme care and being sure that nothing critical was not removed. Also removed everything related to gtk3. No qt5, no Plasma5. No gtk3, no Gnome3. Just that simple.

I had to build older versions of some packages manually, due to Qt5 dependencies their newer versions have. These packages were stellarium (0.13.2 -> 0.12.5), transmission-qt (2.84 -> 2.81), teamspeak3 (3.0.16 -> 3.0.13) and some I can't remember now. I froze them all in /etc/pacman.conf.

Anyway. To be honest, I don't like the situation. I don't want to stick on old program versions but neither I want mix any qt5/plasma5 related stuff into my current "almost-pure" qt4 desktop. I assume Qt5 stuff will either break my system configuration or cause unwanted GUI mix-up. Situation I really want to avoid.

Let me take a bad example: the current situation with Plasma4 and Plasma5 is like having Windows XP installed on your computer but you would gradually mix/implement Windows 7 programs to your old system. And you keep upgrading your system until you have completely transferred your Windows XP to Windows 7. A new great user experience you may say. And from start to the end, the experience between this tranformation....great one? Just a mess, if you ask me. Likely full of bugs, broken packages, broken configurations, tons of googling and reporting of bugs. Moving from a desktop environment to a newer, upgraded version - gradually, that is something where rolling distros like Arch fail and a system admin must understand it to avoid unwanted mess. Don't get me wrong, I like Arch, but it's like Arch wiki already tells about upgrading the system ("With great power comes great responsibility"):

Instead of immediately updating as soon as updates are available, users must recognize that due to the nature of Arch's rolling release approach, an update may have unforeseen consequences. This means that it is not wise to update if, for example, one is about to deliver an important presentation. Rather, update during free time and be prepared to deal with any problems that may arise.

And that's pretty good notification. Don't apply upgrades without thinking. First rule: do not be stupid, do not upgrade until you're 100% sure and double checked that nothing will not break with newer package versions. Make sure you will be, in the case of trouble, able to install older version of a problematic package either compiling it from source or just using pre-compiled version (tar.xz) of it - or doing anything equivalent.

And as kokoko3k replied, this applies to me, too:

I'm not in the mood of being a kde beta-tester right now, and i also think that this time arch went to the wrong way.

Let's see what the situation will be within 2-3 years, when everything and everybody will use Qt5 libs by default, and Qt4 will bw pretty much in situation where the original Gnome 2.32 is at the moment.

Last edited by Fincer (2015-03-01 22:43:02)

kar · 2015-03-02 20:09:00

@Fincer

Good comment! I understand you and I (partly) agree with you, but:

The arch devs working hard and they have to manage many packages. So I think, with the man-power (actually) it isn't possible to maintain two different KDE versions. And because of this, I can understand the actually way.

I migrate to Plasma 5 3-4 weeks ago and for me it's working really good and I haven't (big) problems at the moment. The Qt4 Apps looks really good on the Qt5 desktop (e.g. Dolphin looks like a native Qt5 app) and I can live with the situation. And for me, I like it to using Plasma 5 and it's interesting to see the development of the new Desktop (incl. the KDE Apps and the Frameworks). The KDE devs are on the right way!

If you prefer a more stable Linux-Distri (with a pure KDE 4 / Qt4 desktop), I think you should go to a distri like Kubuntu LTS or Debian. If you want or need a rock stable (Qt) desktop, I think Arch is the wrong distri.

I'm using Arch only on my private computers. Professionally I prefer a distri like Kubuntu LTS or Debian.

Fincer · 2015-03-03 15:21:29

Thanks kar.

I migrate to Plasma 5 3-4 weeks ago and for me it's working really good and I haven't (big) problems at the moment. The Qt4 Apps looks really good on the Qt5 desktop (e.g. Dolphin looks like a native Qt5 app) and I can live with the situation. And for me, I like it to using Plasma 5 and it's interesting to see the development of the new Desktop (incl. the KDE Apps and the Frameworks). The KDE devs are on the right way!

Yeah, that's true. Qt5 is the future, Qt4 becomes older bit by bit. I've also tested pure Plasma 5 desktop and my overall experiences are quite positive. However, I feel it's still "under development" and thus I'm not going to install it to my main system. Not yet. Patience.

The arch devs working hard and they have to manage many packages. So I think, with the man-power (actually) it isn't possible to maintain two different KDE versions. And because of this, I can understand the actually way.

I agree. And that's the point where responsibilities of Arch system admins come out: understanding the nature of this distribution. Upgrades are there but basically no-one tells you to upgrade the system. As you work as admin, you take full care of your system installation and upgrades you want to install. I admit it's not actually devs fault if you break a desktop environment or you, as system admin, do not *really* understand the true nature of the Arch distribution. Using Arch is something which comes with greater system admin responsibilities than maintaining just a simple Windows OS with nice GUI and paid M$ assistance available out there.

As I cited on my previous message. If something is about to break with upgrades, do not apply them, just ignore them as long as you can be sure it's okay to proceed. At least check which upgrades you really need in a light of system security or improved application functions. All new stuff is nice but what is the price? If the price is something like spending many hours trying to figure out the source of a problem you may got with a fresh upgrade, it may not be worth it.

If you prefer a more stable Linux-Distri (with a pure KDE 4 / Qt4 desktop), I think you should go to a distri like Kubuntu LTS or Debian. If you want or need a rock stable (Qt) desktop, I think Arch is the wrong distri.

I've used Ubuntu for 3 years as my primary and only operating system. That's ironical: actually the downside with these distributions is that they are not rolling releases. Ubuntu is updated two times in a year by Canonical. If you want to keep the pace and your critical linux applications upgraded, you practically need to wipe out your previous Ubuntu installation and upgrade to a newer version at least once within every two years. You can keep your old Ubuntu installation to some point but eventually upgrading daily programs and keeping your old system at the same time becomes more and more impossible, day by day. Thanks to far-reaching package dependencies on some programs. Of course, security upgrades have been dropped out from official repositories long ago before you actually reach the critical point with your aging daily applications.

I had a situation with my old Ubuntu 10.04 LTS. I was pretty fine with the system itself but I had an old version of Quantum GIS program. It was version number 1.8. I wanted to keep my Ubuntu OS but, at the same time, I also wanted to upgrade QGis to version 2.0 because it had several new features. However, that was not possible due to bunch of dependencies that were not satisfiable for Quantum GIS 2.0 on Ubuntu 10.04 LTS. I was still able to build many programs (such as Wine) from source on Ubuntu 10.04 LTS but QGis was a total road blocker: When a program like QGis has system dependencies which are depended on more dependencies...it's just a jungle nightmare. Maintaining the system like that in reasonable way becomes just impossible. You simply run out of options. You have to upgrade.

(The actual reason I wanted to stay on Ubuntu 10.04 LTS was the nice Ubuntu Netbook Launcher EFL (predecessor of Unity) which I still miss sometimes.)

Anyway. Rolling distros *may* have the same problem with old/new packages mixed together but it may not escalate so seriously. At least I hope so. I'm a bit junior with Arch (used a year or so) so I'm still learning the true nature of this distribution. I just learned one lesson about system upgrades in a hard way, thanks to this Qt4/Qt5 issue.

Last edited by Fincer (2015-03-03 15:23:48)

firekage · 2015-03-04 21:47:31

kar wrote:

@Fincer
If you want or need a rock stable (Qt) desktop, I think Arch is the wrong distri.
.

In my opinion Ubuntu is less reliable than Arch, even with newest packages and upgrades. I used it, along with Arch, for about the same amount of time, 2 years, i quess (in the same time, now i use only arch, and it is few years in a row)? I had always problems with it, almost never with Arch. The funniest thing about "ubuntu based" os are something related to removing of installed apps. Aptitude and apt-get when deleting apps, removing them, uninstalling them, can cause such mess that it is even pointless to try to fix it. I will remember for my life one funny thing - i removed, in ubuntu, libre office (or it was open office, don't remember now) and after reboot i could not log to ubuntu...becaue half system was removed also...either with lightdm...Why aptitude and apt-get removed lightdm with libre/open office? Don'kt know...Arch has one advantage - pacmans is really reliable and when i do -Rns, -Rdd i can count that it will do a good job.

It's a waste that i found this topic so late...i would stick mainly to kde4, not kf5. Now i have 50/50 of both...

Last edited by firekage (2015-03-04 21:51:10)

JKAbrams · 2015-03-05 12:46:55

Fincer wrote:

I had a situation with my old Ubuntu 10.04 LTS. I was pretty fine with the system itself but I had an old version of Quantum GIS program. It was version number 1.8. I wanted to keep my Ubuntu OS but, at the same time, I also wanted to upgrade QGis to version 2.0 because it had several new features. However, that was not possible due to bunch of dependencies that were not satisfiable for Quantum GIS 2.0 on Ubuntu 10.04 LTS. I was still able to build many programs (such as Wine) from source on Ubuntu 10.04 LTS but QGis was a total road blocker: When a program like QGis has system dependencies which are depended on more dependencies...it's just a jungle nightmare. Maintaining the system like that in reasonable way becomes just impossible. You simply run out of options. You have to upgrade.

I had the same problem with Debian, I needed new versions of two applications: Wine (to run Photoshop CS5) and Firefox (for web dev. related testing). Both are a pain to build on Debian especially Wine, I ended up with Debian Unstable and the situation deteriorated quickly downward until it was impossible to keep the system in a usable state.

As for Kubuntu, after Canonical started shipping spyware with their software they can no longer be trusted.

hamelg · 2015-04-20 20:51:58

It seems that staying on KDE 4 is becoming complicated.
Today, pacman refuses to update my system :
:: The following packages cannot be upgraded due to unresolvable dependencies:
kcron kmines kpatience kruler kteatime kcalc kcharselect ktimer print-manager
libkdegames
It's time to upgrade to kf5/plasma.

Soukyuu · 2015-04-21 11:24:11

That's bad news. Plasma is still nowhere near stable, design issues aside.

kokoko3k · 2015-04-21 14:44:09

They are not updating those apps, but that doesn't mean that they will not work anymore, right?
-EDIT-
Just updated.
kompare was the only package that gave me problems.
resolved by downgrading and blocking from upgrade:
libkomparediff2 to 14.12.3-1

Last edited by kokoko3k (2015-04-21 15:25:42)

Soukyuu · 2015-04-21 23:21:22

That's true, I guess. But with the gcc5 rebuild incoming, I'm guessing we won't have a choice but to upgrade (or somehow get the sources of the kde4 versions), or not update the system at all.

kokoko3k · 2015-04-22 06:20:18

Say gwenview rely on kdelibs4, kdelibs4 are built against gcc5 and gwenview has been compiled with gcc4, maybe it will run (?)
I really don't know.
-edit
Another idea comes to mind... is even possible to run kde in a docker container?

Last edited by kokoko3k (2015-04-22 06:23:34)

gotunandan · 2015-04-27 07:18:20

gcc5 is coming - gcc-5.1 in [testing] https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/a … 27138.html

I am wondering what to do next, any ideas ?

I have the following in /etc/pacman.conf

# Pacman won't upgrade packages listed in IgnorePkg and members of IgnoreGroup
IgnoreGroup = kf5 plasma-next
IgnorePkg = konsole kwrite kate gwenview konsolepart4 katepart4 yakuake

kokoko3k · 2015-04-27 08:46:55

There's a chance that, say, kate compiled with 4.9 will still work on kde-libs compiled with gcc 5.1
Only alternative is to recompile kate by hand.

Last edited by kokoko3k (2015-04-27 08:47:18)

tp · 2015-04-27 17:02:02

I would also like to stay on KDE4.

However, I do not understand what's the problem with gcc5.
Why would it be not possible to recompile the whole KDE4 with gcc5?

I have gcc5 installed and do not have any problems so far, or that's because of --with-default-libstdcxx-abi=c++98.

Using the new libstdc++ with old applications shouldn't be really a problem either (as long as std::string is passed around), the old std::string abi is still present (afaik).

I really hope support for KDE4 won't be dropped too soon, I have tried KDE5 for about two months, but it was an awful experience, and there are lots of bugs.

Lone_Wolf · 2015-04-28 19:16:34

KDE now consists of 3 parts : Plasma , Frameworks & Applications.

More and more of the applications are ported to frameworks 5, i expect it will soon be very hard to run KDE4 on archlinux .
Those who want to stay on kde4 may want to start looking at distros with LTS releases, or consider forking KDE4 like gnome2 users did when gnome3 came out.

tp · 2015-04-29 16:03:54

Lone_Wolf wrote:

KDE now consists of 3 parts : Plasma , Frameworks & Applications.
More and more of the applications are ported to frameworks 5, i expect it will soon be very hard to run KDE4 on archlinux .

That would be ok for me, as long as I can keep using the KDE4 taskbar, because KDE5's taskbar is full of bugs, especially with desktop effects disabled.
Besides those bugs, the KDE5 taskbar also needs *a whole lot* more space to keep two rows, and that's really annoying.

Lone_Wolf wrote:

Those who want to stay on kde4 may want to start looking at distros with LTS releases, or consider forking KDE4 like gnome2 users did when gnome3 came out.

I just came from Kubuntu, and I honestly don't want to switch back...

Let's hope someone will fork KDE4, or otherwise I/we will be forced to switch to a different DE, or even better, the annoying bugs will be finally fixed in KDE5 until then.

Last edited by tp (2015-04-29 16:06:32)

Alad · 2015-04-29 16:24:30

I'm sure someone will come up with a KDE4 maintenance branch at some point. Or just use Trinity.

otherwise I/we will be forced to switch to a different DE

And?

tp · 2015-04-29 16:57:03

Alad wrote:

I'm sure someone will come up with a KDE4 maintenance branch at some point. Or just use Trinity.
otherwise I/we will be forced to switch to a different DE
And?

What do you mean by 'And?'?
I am (more or less) forced to switch to a different desktop environment if those bugs won't be fixed.

Awebb · 2015-04-30 08:06:08

I think Alad was trying to determine, whether you threaten to take yourself hostage in some obscure way.

Fincer · 2015-05-03 09:57:08

What does actually make you update your system in the first place? Security? New features? You may ask yourself if you urgently need the updates or if you can halt them. Basically, if your Qt4-based system works as a whole and satisfies your personal requirements, why do you still update?

Do you want run Plasma 4 and ignore Qt5 stuff? Well, do not consider updating all packages as a self-purpose and do not let daily system-wide updates obsess you. Updating may just lead to a breakage of your working computer/OS environment and you'll find yourself in trouble. If you can handle that burden and spend many hours fixing problems, fine then. It's up to you, after all. If you decide to update, be aware of possible consequences you may encounter. I know that there are security concerns on the other side of the coin but halting updates is a compromise and still a temporary solution. There will be a day when it's time to say goodbye for Plasma 4 and wipe it out from our computers but I think that day is just not there yet.

If you do not have a necessary need for system-wide updates, I recommend taking another approach: individual updates. Update only the packages you truly want to update. And ignore everything else. Well, that is not always possible if the newer package version with dozens of new sweet features is based heavily on Qt5.

Anyway, I update only packages which I think to have a need for updating. There is a command with which you can check package updates system-widely, still not updating them (it just lists available updates and version numbers, nothing more):

pacman -Qu

Update your packages individually with command

pacman -S <package_name>

Resyncing your pacman database with the following command helps if you have missing mirror sources while updating an individual package (errors appear):

pacman -Syy

If some package which is listed using pacman -Qu and you want necessarily update it but it has few Qt5 dependencies, I recommend to take bit dirty trial & error approach: compile the package yourself. Just remove Qt5 dependencies from the PKGBUILD depends list and see whether the package compiles or not. Yes, it's random, maybe stupid and may fail. And it is not an ideal or elegant solution but may help you keep your critical packages updated while staying on Plasma 4 environment. If you somehow manage to compile the package, there is still a little risk that it may misbehave due to removal of Qt5 related dependencies from compilation process.

Good luck with maintaining your Plasma 4 system alive. It may not be easy but if you can make compromises with package versions you may successfully be able to keep Plasma 4 still running while the Qt world is moving towards Qt5.

Lone_Wolf · 2015-05-03 10:51:13

Fincer (and everyone considering the same approach ) , there are many downsides to that method.

please check Partial_upgrades_are_unsupported and
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=89328 .

If after reading those someone decides to do partial upgrades, run the checkupdates script regularly to find out which packages have newer versions.

Last edited by Lone_Wolf (2015-05-03 10:51:35)

Arch Linux

#26 2015-02-25 07:55:51

Re: Staying on KDE 4

#27 2015-03-01 22:33:09

Re: Staying on KDE 4

#28 2015-03-02 20:09:00

Re: Staying on KDE 4

#29 2015-03-03 15:21:29

Re: Staying on KDE 4

#30 2015-03-04 21:47:31

Re: Staying on KDE 4

#31 2015-03-05 12:46:55

Re: Staying on KDE 4

#32 2015-04-20 20:51:58

Re: Staying on KDE 4

#33 2015-04-21 11:24:11

Re: Staying on KDE 4

#34 2015-04-21 14:44:09

Re: Staying on KDE 4

#35 2015-04-21 23:21:22

Re: Staying on KDE 4

#36 2015-04-22 06:20:18

Re: Staying on KDE 4

#37 2015-04-27 07:18:20

Re: Staying on KDE 4

#38 2015-04-27 08:46:55

Re: Staying on KDE 4

#39 2015-04-27 17:02:02

Re: Staying on KDE 4

#40 2015-04-28 19:16:34

Re: Staying on KDE 4

#41 2015-04-29 16:03:54

Re: Staying on KDE 4

#42 2015-04-29 16:24:30

Re: Staying on KDE 4

#43 2015-04-29 16:57:03

Re: Staying on KDE 4

#44 2015-04-30 08:06:08

Re: Staying on KDE 4

#45 2015-05-03 09:57:08

Re: Staying on KDE 4

#46 2015-05-03 10:51:13

Re: Staying on KDE 4

Board footer