Bug#119517: #119517 (wrt: Konq and SSL)
From: Daniel Stone [mailto:email@example.com]
> The doubling of archive thing size was total BS.
Agreed. I wasn't really paying attention to the layout of the KDE
binaries and libraries when I wrote that. Heck, I don't even use KDE,
it was just an example pulled out of a hat. Disregard the archive
doubling thing, then. The rest still stands.
> Yes, but you are providing a binary. Konq isn't called ssl-browser, or
> konqueror-with-ssl-support, or whatever. When you provide a binary,
> must explicitly declare all the Depends needed to make it run.
I think this has been the argument all along, actually. People are
trying to figure out why "a tiny binary in a large package filled with
binaries" is more important than "a tiny function in a single binary".
> I'm with Manoj's suggestion. I think yours is a quick hack that
> shouldn't make it into Debian for fear of setting an ugly precedent.
FWIW, you're probably right. Then again, I'm not the maintainer, and I
don't want to be, so my opinion is just that -- opinion. I don't envy
Brian in the slightest. pcmcia-cs is a pain. :)