[Pidgin] #2883: Not a bug, yet still a HUGE pain: no binary installed

[Pidgin]

#2883: Not a bug, yet still a HUGE pain: no binary installed
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------
  Reporter:  bezeek        |       Owner:       
      Type:  defect        |      Status:  new  
  Priority:  minor         |   Milestone:       
 Component:  pidgin (gtk)  |     Version:  2.1.1
Resolution:                |    Keywords:       
   Pending:  1             |  
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------
Changes (by bezeek):

  * pending:  1 => 0

Comment:

 It seems you're unfamiliar with
 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portage_(software) Portage] and what it
 does. Simply put, it keeps track of installed software and automates (not
 alters or controls) the installation process that is already in place.
 That is, it works essentially the same as any other distribution's
 'installer' or 'package manager' (e.g.
 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Packaging_Tool apt],
 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_dog_Updater%2C_Modified yum],
 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Package_management_system#Free_software_systems
 etc.]) What should be added is a check at the end of the 'make install'
 process to see which binary (if not both) was created, and inform the user
 of such, so one knows what sort of (pseudo-)positive result came of the
 installation. A more appealing solution could be to split Pidgin and Finch
 into separate source packages, then check-fail GTK for Pidgin in the
 configure script, and likewise for Finch and its dependancies.

 Making note that there's no time to read build messages on the fly, the
 convincing argument that led me to believe Pidgin was installed was that
 installation ran start to finish without throwing any errors. Obviously if
 the software is failing to complete the task the user has given it, that
 is considered unexpected behavior, a.k.a. failure. It should be treated as
 such. Nobody would extrapolate a lack of errors/warnings to mean "there
 was a problem, but installing something else instead seems to be a fair
 workaround." That's like getting a Big Mac from a Fuddruckers because
 they're all out of their own burgers and the meat probobly came from the
 same distributor anyway.

 I could see falling back to [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki QT] if GTK isn't
 available, (which may take very little work, though I'm no QT or GTK
 programmer,) as that would not change the user's experience. Frankly
 however, I don't know a soul who wouldn't find issue with the nice GUI
 program they downloaded and installed turning out to be a text-based
 alternative requiring a different command to run.

 Sorry to sound hostile, but in light, it is a very lame way of dealing
 with missing dependancies, especially when so many alternatives - ranging
 from simple yet acceptable, to sophisticated and ideal - exist.

 I hope my feedback can be of some use.

 - Brian

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://developer.pidgin.im/ticket/2883#comment:2>
Pidgin <http://pidgin.im>
Pidgin