Re: no{thing} build profiles
On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 11:12:57PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 01:22:12PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl> writes:
> >
> > > Thus, I'd re-propose a Policy change that was mentioned in multiple
> > > threads in the past:
> >
> > > "A runtime library should not Depend: or Recommend: on any packages than
> > > other libraries or dormant data, unless the library or its programming
> > > language provides a convenient scheme for it being loaded only
> > > optionally. Any such dependencies should be declared by programs linked
> > > against such a library."
> >
> > I think the prerequisite for making a change like this would be for the
> > library to be able to surface this transitive requirement in metadata so
> > that debhelper could support automatically adding it to the dependencies
> > of all linked programs (and I'm not sure that sort of collapse of our
> > dependency structure is a good idea).
>
> That would be a bad idea -- we don't want gratuitous dependencies all
> around. Just because I use xfce doesn't mean I want a daemon for some old
> kinds of iApple iJunk
Why not? What does it cost you, other than a few bits on your hard disk,
to have those things installed?
It is an actual cost for users who do not (want to) understand the
technical background in why their iSomething doesn't communicate with
Debian properly, and it costs *us* time in support questions if we have
to explain to them that they just need to install this one little thing
here that takes a few MB (if that; haven't checked).
My laptop, which has a 240G SSD, is mostly full. That is, however, *not*
because of the amount of software that's installed; 90% of that storage
is in my /home.
I suspect that the same is true for most users, and therefore that we
just shouldn't care about it.
--
To the thief who stole my anti-depressants: I hope you're happy
-- seen somewhere on the Internet on a photo of a billboard
Reply to: