You are not logged in.
I have been holding off updating my wife's Arch system. She runs kde3 and will not be happy with an interface change. How can I set pacman.conf to allow me to do global upgrades without pulling in kde4 updates?
Offline
Use the IgnorePkg option. There some info in this thread: http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=52271 There might be other threads about it; search the forums.
Offline
I have been holding off updating my wife's Arch system. She runs kde3 and will not be happy with an interface change. How can I set pacman.conf to allow me to do global upgrades without pulling in kde4 updates?
This is not a suggestion, but something to consider. I ASSUME if you install kdemod3 you won't have to worry about pacman "upgrading" your system to KDE4. This makes sense, but more knowledable people might know better.
Of course the time may come when you want KDE4 and you would have to remove kdemod3 and then install KDE4. I don't think doing this would be a big deal.
Its something to consider, but I would definitely make an image of the Arch partition using something like partimage before installing kdemod3 or going the IgnorePkg route in pacman.conf.
Live Free or Die !
Offline
I for one would appreciate a warning not to upgrade to Kde4 because it sucks in its present format.
The idea of "rolling release" has been violated by this recent kde4 episode and I suspect it is embroiled in poor understanding and irreversible changes that will affect kde3-based packages far into the future, esp those in aur.
I would welcome a poll of all, and I do mean all archlinux registered users as to the[u]need
u] for kde4 at any time now or forever.
It seems it is a "new" thing but not justifiable for a "rolling release" that ruins the performance of many,many users and does not add any useful "needful" operating characteristics.
Perhaps a second archlinuxOS1 can be provided for those who love to change for changes sake...bored otherwise!!!
My system is broken with this "upgrade" and any new upgrades, even with "ignore" are questionable if using kde3 instead of the new kde4. It would seem a list of incompatibilities will be necessary or at most, use the CLI and
dump kde.
These are my views to which I am entitled to express on this forum thread having been an archer for almost 5 years. This "upgrade" was and is the worst I have encountered and is not "needed".
Prove the "need", anyone!!!!!
Prediction...This year will be a very odd year!
Hard work does not kill people but why risk it: Charlie Mccarthy
A man is not complete until he is married..then..he is finished.
When ALL is lost, what can be found? Even bytes get lonely for a little bit! X-ray confirms Iam spineless!
Offline
lilsirecho's view:
Essentially, +1 from me!
The KDE 4.1 upgrade has proven an almost unmitigated disaster which takes a beautifully functional KDE (3.5.9) system to something which is badly broken and pretty well unusable for a production (rather than a hobby) system.
Make no mistake, I think the Arch developers have done a very good job in packaging KDE 4.1 well, but it shouldn't have become the standard KDE for many months yet.
I don't intend wasting any more time in pursuing KDE 4.1; I'm seriously looking at using Gnome now.
Offline
whatever other's views, KDE 4.1 performs quite well for me, and looks great, I recommend at least giving it a try. yes there are still a FEW things that do need fixed (admin mode for one thing, also compiz doesn't play well with it) but its a .0 release.
Offline
lilsirecho +1 from me
Compared to KDE 3.59 the new version looks like a 'oh we announced to release a new version today - we better do that' release - it is not worth upgrading at all. Mind you I just use a few KDE apps usually but even then it sucks to first disable the upgrade in order to be able to use those. I would strongly recommend the consideration of a different upgrade policy for such 'early shots' in the future - it should not be too difficult to leave the decision on an upgrade to the user instead of forcing them to prevent one.
Offline