digikam update - should I look for a (slimmer) replacement?

imrehg · 2009-03-19 11:15:35

Hi!

I'm using Xfce and Digikam, so I have a few parts of the kde libs installed to make it work. Today I was checking the packages to be updated, and there's a new version of digikam. The thing is, that it comes with 320Mb other stuff, needed by kdegraphics, kdepimlibs, and kdelibs.

Since it's an EeePC, I don't have much space anyway, and been wondering, is this 320Mb a replacement of some of the libraries (thus not entirely newly occupied space) or pure "fattening"? Because if I need >300Mb just to download the pictures from my camera, then maybe it's time to look for something slimmer....
Or can digikam compiled such that it's include all necessary libraries and won't need all the ballast?

Cheers!

ise · 2009-03-19 12:13:11

Hi,

the "problem" is that digikam needs libkexiv2 and libkdcraw, both libraries are provided by kdegraphics. kdepimlibs is needed for some plugins in kipi-plugins and kdelibs is needed because of kdegraphics. No way to have this thing smaller. I'm not so happy with the dependencies, too, but no way to make it smaller. Maybe you find the standalone libraries on the internet and you can compile against them, but since KDE4 those were included into kdegraphics.

Daniel

EDIT:

Smaller/slimmer replacements could be:
f-spot (needs mono)
gthumb

Last edited by ise (2009-03-19 12:18:58)

Daenyth · 2009-03-19 12:19:39

If you use abs you should be able to compile it... I for one would love a digikam-slim package perhaps... compile in the libraries it needs. Maybe static?

Pierre · 2009-03-19 12:33:54

Yes, those deps are quite extrem. But I think once we have the new pacman version we should be able to cut it down to just those deps which are realy needed.

a0peter · 2009-03-19 16:33:54

You could take a look at Intipunku. It is not in AUR, if I had the skills I would do a packagebuild, but I'm still very new to Arch.

userlander · 2009-03-19 16:42:13

Try gtkam in XFCE4. It's very light.

imrehg · 2009-03-20 00:04:18

ise wrote:

the "problem" is that digikam needs libkexiv2 and libkdcraw, both libraries are provided by kdegraphics. kdepimlibs is needed for some plugins in kipi-plugins and kdelibs is needed because of kdegraphics. No way to have this thing smaller. I'm not so happy with the dependencies, too, but no way to make it smaller. Maybe you find the standalone libraries on the internet and you can compile against them, but since KDE4 those were included into kdegraphics.

If there's no way to make it smaller, then there's some serious problem with this dependency-web. I mean there are a number of 3rd degree dependencies even (e.g. kdegraphics -> ebook-tools -> libzip) just to get it work...
Is it because of the internal reorganization of the KDE4 libraries?

ise wrote:

Smaller/slimmer replacements could be:
f-spot (needs mono)
gthumb

Cheers for the suggestions. f-spot looks better.but it comes with 120Mb "package" of dependencies. The previous digikam is 33Mb, the new 320Mb, gthumb is 8Mb...
Tried gthumb, and it's pretty bare - but that's mostly what I'd need anyway, a downloader. If it had a way to show which pictures were already downloaded and which are new, then it would be total sweetness. So maybe I'll check out some source code later...

userlander wrote:

Try gtkam in XFCE4. It's very light.

gtkam - 1.5Mb, very light indeed, maybe a bit too much. I'd prefer not to manually browse through the directories on the camera. Will check it out a bit more, though, it was just a quick look. Thanks!

a0peter wrote:

ou could take a look at Intipunku. It is not in AUR, if I had the skills I would do a packagebuild, but I'm still very new to Arch.

Thanks! It looks interesting, I'll put together a PKGBUILD hopefully over the weekend and let you know.

imrehg · 2009-03-20 00:08:36

Pierre wrote:

Yes, those deps are quite extrem. But I think once we have the new pacman version we should be able to cut it down to just those deps which are realy needed.

That sounds interesting, how would the new pacman cut down on the deps? It would be great, however thinking about it, I'd think that would require "partial" packages (e.g. not the whole kdegraphics in this case, just the relevant parts), but that would open up a whole new can of worms...
So you guys must have a better idea, than I do.

Arch Linux

#1 2009-03-19 11:15:35

digikam update - should I look for a (slimmer) replacement?

#2 2009-03-19 12:13:11

Re: digikam update - should I look for a (slimmer) replacement?

#3 2009-03-19 12:19:39

Re: digikam update - should I look for a (slimmer) replacement?

#4 2009-03-19 12:33:54

Re: digikam update - should I look for a (slimmer) replacement?

#5 2009-03-19 16:33:54

Re: digikam update - should I look for a (slimmer) replacement?

#6 2009-03-19 16:42:13

Re: digikam update - should I look for a (slimmer) replacement?

#7 2009-03-20 00:04:18

Re: digikam update - should I look for a (slimmer) replacement?

#8 2009-03-20 00:08:36

Re: digikam update - should I look for a (slimmer) replacement?

Board footer