Re: Bug#560786: gdb: Please make the python dependency optional
Ben:
On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 9:26 PM, Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-12-20 at 11:17 +1030, Ron wrote:
> [...]
>> I don't understand the pushback I'm getting on this. The bloat that was
>> already added _far_ outweighs the little extra it needs to fix it, and
>> that's before we save on pruning away libgdb. I don't think I'd be going
>> out on a limb to suggest this will be of benefit to far more people than
>> the number who'll need python scripts to use gdb. Am I?
>>
>> Really, what am I missing here?
>
> What you're missing is that gdb's scripting facilities were pathetic,
> and Python integration finally fixes that.
While that's nice to know, I personally don't script Python and
wouldn't want to have to install it on a restricted environment just
for a feature I don't use. It's paying for a feature that isn't
necessary, so I understand Ron's frustration here.
Ideally, this sounds like something that should be fixed in
coordination with upstream -- perhaps asking if they could dynamically
load Python libraries so as to use the feature if the right stuff is
available, or otherwise fall back without increasing the requirements
of the gdb package.
>
> Ben.
>
> --
> Ben Hutchings
> Humans are not rational beings; they are rationalising beings.
>
Reply to: