>>> Should the kstyle directories and files be changed to tdestyle? >>> >>Probably. How much would that break at this point though >>configuration wise? > >I don't know. I'm not complaining. :-) I only noticed the >differences when I was responding to bug report 1609. Seems we >have >moved far with so much renaming and of late we have continued some > >mopping up of those efforts. :-) > >A quick scan of modules that install files to >$PREFIX/share/apps/kstyle: > >tdelibs >tdebase >tdeartwork >tdesdk > >I don't have all packages installed right now so there might be a >few more. > >Other loose ends include renaming $TDEHOME/share/apps/kstyle- >>tdestyle, where ever that is defined (tdelibs?), and r14-xdg- >update. Probably other loose ends too. > >I notice when grepping the sources some internal functions of >kstyle* still exist. tdebase/kpersonalizer has cpp files with >kstyle8. > >I could hammer out and test the patches. The grunt work of the >patches should go fine, but I'd need a some days of validating >build runs and usability testing. If I get overwhelmed I holler. >Probably first scream and cry, but eventually holler. :-) Creating patches went surprisingly smooth. The final list is short: tdelibs tdebase tdeartwork tdesdk tde-style-lipstik tde-style-qtcurve koffice tde-i18n I had no build errors. A superficial test of selecting the styles in kcontrol resulted in no errors or problems. Caveat: The tde-i18n patch is huge. So huge that I will not even try to post the patch or try to push to git until I reduce to smaller patches and push piece-meal one at a time. That said, how do we want to proceed next? I can post the patches online and somebody else could test. Or I could just push to git and listen for screams of pain and anguish. No problems noticed here, but I'm only one person with my own perspective. Darrell