| Weekly edition | Kernel | Security | Distributions | Search |
| Archives | Calendar | Subscribe | Write for LWN | LWN.net FAQ |
ICAL - why not cotinue to use it?
ICAL - why not cotinue to use it?
Posted Mar 9, 2004 22:08 UTC (Tue) by subhasroy (guest, #325)Parent article: A grumpy editor's calendar search
If ICal does the job best, then why not continue to use it? It is simple to build an Ical package for your favourite distro. Just to run KOrganizer, I'd not want to run the whole KDE infrstructure, if I am not using KDE desktop.
I personally continue to use Ical on my IceWm desktop.
(Log in to post comments)
ICAL - why not cotinue to use it?
Posted Mar 9, 2004 22:26 UTC (Tue) by rfunk (subscriber, #4054) [Link]
Just to run KOrganizer, I'd not want to run the whole KDE infrstructure, if I am not using KDE desktop.No need to run all of KDE just to run korganizer. It runs in any environment.
ICAL - why not cotinue to use it?
Posted Mar 10, 2004 21:51 UTC (Wed) by subhasroy (guest, #325) [Link]
But it will load all KDE and Qt libraries which are pretty huge I think.I already run other Tcl/Tk apps all the time and so tcl/tk libs won't cost extra for me.
ICAL - why not cotinue to use it?
Posted Mar 9, 2004 22:36 UTC (Tue) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link]
I actually grabbed the source and tried to build it. Got through the first four or five roadblocks before deciding that, sometimes, you have to take the hint and move on to something that's actually maintained.
ICAL - why not cotinue to use it?
Posted Mar 10, 2004 1:20 UTC (Wed) by clint (subscriber, #7076) [Link]
The latest package in Debian was 2.2-9, but you can get an earlier incarnation at http://archive.debian.org/dists/slink/main/binary-i386/misc/ical_2.2-2.deb .There's always a possibility of reviving it.
ICAL - why not cotinue to use it?
Posted Mar 23, 2004 1:11 UTC (Tue) by bayard (guest, #20385) [Link]
I have gone almost exactly the same route as the Editor, and I haveconsidered (even tried, probably, I don't remember now) to use it
as unpackaged from /usr/local. The trouble is it is a Tk app, and Tk
keeps changing at a scary pace (ask the Debian Tk maintainer), so at some point it is almost guaranteed to break with the current Tk and require one that is no longer in Debian, if it has not happened already. In fact the reason why apt decided to remove it was probably it needed to get rid of the underlying Tk.