[Pkg-xfce-devel] Bug#755071: evince-gtk still necessary?
biebl at debian.org
Wed Oct 15 21:34:19 UTC 2014
On Thu, 17 Jul 2014 19:17:10 +0200 Fabian Greffrath
<fabian at greffrath.com> wrote:
> Dear XFCE4 and LXDE maintainers,
> Am Donnerstag, den 17.07.2014, 15:38 +0200 schrieb Andreas Henriksson:
> > Could you please ask your question about dropping evince-gtk to those
> > that use it? eg. the XFCE or LXDE people.
> > I have no objections against dropping it if noone feel they need it and
> > updates their dependencies accordingly.
> I'd like to ask you to elaborate if a separate evince-gtk package is
> still necessary for your purposes, please. I have given a rationale in
> > Hi all,
> > I wonder if a separate evince-gtk package is still necessary at all.
> > If I am
> > not mistaken, evince has only two more package dependencies than
> > evince-gtk:
> > libnautilus-extension1a and libsecret-1-0.
> > Since evince-gtk identifies itself as "evince without GNOME keyring
> > support", I
> > guess it is the second dependency that is meant to get removed by the
> > separate
> > build. However, libsecret-1-0 has only two additional dependencies
> > that aren't
> > pulled in by evince[-gtk] anyway: libgcrypt11 and libsecret-common, of
> > which
> > the latter is an Arch: all package without further dependencies. The
> > libnautilus-extension1a package in turn pulls in libselinux1.
> > So, is this it? Do we really need a separate binary package of evince
> > to avoid
> > the installation of four leaf packages?
Could we have some input from the XFCE/LXDE maintainers on this matter?
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the Pkg-xfce-devel