Re: Wheezy: how to disable SSH gnome-keyring by editing desktop configuration file
On Mon, 01 Aug 2011 13:16:43 -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Camaleón wrote:
>> Bob Proulx wrote:
>> > I disagree. If the package isn't useful then removing it is very
>> > likely the easiest solution. Why frustrate yourself trying to work
>> > around the problem when removing the problem is a good solution too.
>> IMO, removing should be the last resort, the last thing to do.
> No it is not. That is one of the strengths of Debian. You are free to
> create a installation based upon what you want to have installed.
That's another and complete different thing.
For instance, I do not use NM on my workstation boxes nor Avahi-zeroconf
so I disable those, but I disable those not because I don't know how to
setup them but becasue I don't like what they provide. And I prefer to
keep them installed because they can be useful in some scenarios so I
keep them -disabled but installed-, they do not disturb my day-to-day
> I know that with some other distributions you are expected to have a
> set bundle of packages installed and any deviation from that bundle
> isn't tolerated very well. But that isn't Debian. In Debian it is
> perfectly fine to install what you need and to not install what you do
> not need or do not want. Really!
Yes, but Jerome was not complaining about a "bloated" system but how to
solve a specific problem he had with gnome-keyring and how to disable it.
He read the docs and did not found a convenient nor easy way to do what
he wanted to get. And I also think that in this case, the README file
lacks for basic instructions on what "exactly" has to be edited and in
Should he had found this steps easily, I bet that gnome-keyring is still
on his system :-)
>> Maybe if the package is completely broken or if by-passes do not work
>> as expected, then it's okay to get rid off it (even in such cases I
>> prefer to first open a bug report at tell that something supposed to
>> work it fails). I like to understand how stuff works.
> Of course understanding how things work is great. And filing bug
> reports as appropriate improves things for everyone. But when software
> is mostly a packaging of an upstream and the upstream isn't very
> responsive or has their own vision and agenda then sometimes it just
> isn't productive. You have heard the old RAH quote, "Never try to teach
> a pig to sing; it wastes your time and it annoys the pig." Unfortunately
> sometimes that is true of software projects too.
I really don't think this is a packaging/packager issue nor a problem
with unresposive devels...
>> Anyway, "gnome-keyring" is part of the GNOME security stack and
>> password management and I find it very convenient for this task, but
>> that's of course up to each user.
> If it is good for you then that is great! I found that was completely
> broken for my use and I had to work around it in order to make things
> work for me. My workaround was much less pleasant than removing the
> broken package. But I expect that either one or both of gnome-keyring
> or libpam-gnome-keyring will be removed from my systems until the
> offending behavior is corrected. And that is perfectly okay from a
> Debian viewpoint.
Nobody said it's not okay to remove a package. I said (or wanted to
state) that removing a package because something is unknown (in this
case, how to widely avoid gnome-keyring-ssh from starting) is not what I
would have done, I don't like to surrender to my OS (being Debian or
whatever OS you prefer...), I prefer to fight >;-)