[NEW] suggestion for a new port kde4-workspace

[RJVB (René Bertin)]

This is a submission of a port for the KDE Workspace package. Much of the package is irrelevant for if not incompatible with a system on which KDE is not X11-based. It is possible, however, to build the systemsettings application as well as the oxygen style.

The oxygen style looks quite good and maybe more in line with the visual design of OS X 10.9 than Qt's native style; it also makes the layout more compact. The style works almost perfectly since the latest kde4libs update that was pushed, except for a few updating glitches in (pop-up) menus.

[RJVB (René Bertin)]

patch to avoid building the taskmanager by extending the mechanism already in place for Win32

[RJVB (René Bertin)]

examples of the glitch in menu painting (top frame is correct)

[mkae (Marko Käning)]

This is perhaps also interesting for nicos.

[RJVB (René Bertin)]

I was kind of hoping he'd take over maintenance ;)

[mkae (Marko Käning)]

Ooops, I didn't mean to steal it from him. :)

[RJVB (René Bertin)]

I've simplified the Portfile, moving most definitions of which modules to build into the new patch-CmakeLists-for-OSX.patch . In addition I realised that most of the kcontrol module could be built, so I added a patch for the CMakeLists.txt files involved. With these one can select the application and desktop themes, and configure those that are configurable.

I have looked into adapting these patches for upstream inclusion, but clear the Workspace package has been moved to Plasma 5 already, involving serious reorganisations.

[RJVB (René Bertin)]

This extra patch suppresses the calls to the X11 xrdb utility, which shouldn't be used on OS X.

Note that the krdb.cpp file contains some interesting examples of how Qt settings are handled (modified) by KDE.

[RJVB (René Bertin)]

don't build kcheckpass

[RJVB (René Bertin)]

kde4-workspace Portfile

[mkae (Marko Käning)]

It looks like this is more up-to-date than ​RR 120287, is that correct?

[RJVB (René Bertin)]

No, the addition from a few days ago was only to play catch-up here.

[mkae (Marko Käning)]

Hey, shouldn't we finally bring this port to MacPorts?

It's working just fine!

[NicosPavlov]

If you tested it, you are free to commit it.

By a quick look at it, there are just some syntax issues in my opinion:

• the revision field should be removed for a new submission
• the port uses the plasma version 4.11.12, which is distributed with KDE 4.14, and Macports is still at 4.13. Shouldn't 4.11.11 be used?
• the email of the maintainer is not obfuscated
• phonon is already a dependency of the portgroup kde4 1.1
• the variant can be simplified in syntax. No need to separate the variant and its effects.

Just in case, several of these can be detected when using 'port lint'.

[mkae (Marko Käning)]

Replying to nicos@…:

If you tested it, you are free to commit it.

I did and it worked just fine.

• the revision field should be removed for a new submission

Would do so.

• the port uses the plasma version 4.11.12, which is distributed with KDE 4.14, and Macports is still at 4.13. Shouldn't 4.11.11 be used?

Well, I guess René might have had a reason, why he decided to go for the newer one, but I'll test the 4.11.12 version before committing this.

• the email of the maintainer is not obfuscated

I did so in my local version of this port file.

• phonon is already a dependency of the portgroup kde4 1.1
• the variant can be simplified in syntax. No need to separate the variant and its effects.

2x yep.

[RJVB (René Bertin)]

• the port uses the plasma version 4.11.12, which is distributed with KDE 4.14, and Macports is still at 4.13. Shouldn't 4.11.11 be used?

Well, I guess René might have had a reason, why he decided to go for the newer one... But I've successfully tested the 4.11.11 version before committing this.

Yes he did. It turned out that the latest version worked just fine and under those conditions I don't see a reason to use an older version, esp. not if I have patches to submit for review upstreams.