On Monday 07 of May 2012 20:48:48 Calvin Morrison wrote:
> Hey just a word ;
>
> >> Too many patches to compare ! I think the only ones I have that you
> >> don't are RHEL/Fedora specific, so they won't go upstream.
> >> An important point is the famous "startkde" script. Should we try to
> >> have a stable updated script upstream, or should we keep distro-specific
> >> changes in every packaging ?
> >
> > I am definitely for it to have stable upstream updated script. And to
> > solve specific distribution in it. I do not know how big parts are the
> > distribution specific. But I believe it would go through to resolve by
> > the conditions, or spin-off into a separate "include".
>
> I don't think it's too smart to have distribution specific coding in the
> start file. I think that would be better to keep patched in. For example
> this leads to legacy code when a distribution is no longer included,
> then you end up with lots of extraneous checks that aren't really doing
> anything. That is my opinion. This is just a general principle, if
> something is actually broken (eg there is a incorrect path) it is often
> because things have been hardcoded a long time ago for a single
> distribution or method that has changed or outdated.
>
> I think it's best to keep distribution specific patches in our git
> repository tde-packaging, that was it _is_ available for anyone else to
> see and use, and pull in to their sources, but it's not muddying up the
> main tree.
>
> Calvin
>

I thought if it was set aside for distribution-specific code, it would in 
starttde could be something like:

 if [-e $ TDEDIR / bin / starttde_dist] then
   . $TDEDIR/bin/starttde_dist
 fi

The starttde_dist could be that simply executes at the moment of include. Or 
it could be that would define the functions that would be called in starttde, 
where applicable - as an events.

Distribution would thus maintain its own starttde_dist.

Slavek
--