Re: brasero requires gvfs
On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 04:35:24PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > > Am 02.09.2014 22:18, schrieb Rob Owens:
> > > > I removed the systemd package from my Jessie system, and it took
> > > > brasero with it. Brasero depends on gvfs, and gvfs has some
> > > > trail of dependencies that leads to systemd. I'm thinking that
> > > > the gvfs dependency doesn't make sense for brasero, but I wanted
> > > > to get input from this list before I file a bug against brasero.
> > > >
> > > > Can anybody think of a valid reason why brasero should depend on
> > > > gvfs?
> > >
> > > brasero depends on gvfs so it can detect removable media.
> > > For a burning application this is pretty much essential.
> > >
> > Ah, I was thinking about the SMB:// features and things like that. I
> > didn't realize gvfs was used to detect removable media.
>
> Also, brasero is a GNOME app. So, it's going to have GNOME dependencies
> to work properly. If you're using the default XFCE desktop with Jessie,
> why not try XFCE's xfburn instead. On my GNOME-free (Openbox only)
> Wheezy system, I use it. Runs fine for what little burning I do.
I find that the wodim and mp3burn programs work fine from the command
line and cater for any burning needs I have encountered.
At least, they eliminate any effect the GUI may impose. It certainly
helps with debugging failures as there is a heck of a lot of possible
culprits eliminated in one foul swoop.
I have used gui burning programs in the past and whenever I had any
burning problems it was always a PITA to track down the cause of the
failure, and producing more coasters than necessary.
Now I still get the *occassional* coaster which is more often than not
due to bad media or even a weird image BUT when this does happen it is
certainly a *lot easier* to debug.
--
"If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people
who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the
oppressing." --- Malcolm X
Reply to: