|
From: Jan K. <rcp...@ja...> - 2003-11-06 20:37:48
|
Hi, On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 16:57:57 +0100, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote: > On Thu, 6 Nov 2003, Anton Altaparmakov wrote: ... > > I am tempted to leave them in one rpm but it does have the drawback that > > the ntfsprogs rpm now has more dependencies in that it requires glib and a > > whole lot of other stuff (here is a full list of the added requirements: > > /bin/sh libbonobo-activation.so.4 libcom_err.so.3 libcrypto.so.4 > > libdl.so.2 libgconf-2.so.4 libglib-2.0.so.0 libgmodule-2.0.so.0 > > libgnomevfs-2.so.0 libgobject-2.0.so.0 libgssapi_krb5.so.2 > > libgthread-2.0.so.0 libk5crypto.so.3 libkrb5.so.3 liblinc.so.1 libm.so.6 > > libORBit-2.so.0 libpthread.so.0 libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.0) > > libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.2) libresolv.so.2 librt.so.1 libssl.so.4 > > libxml2.so.2 libz.so.1). ... > I think it's a very bad idea to bring into play all these dependencies. > There are a LOT OF rescue, recovery, backup, etc, etc distro, CD's etc and > about over 99% don't need these. Despite the integrated package would fit my personal needs better I also have to vote for a separate ntfsprogs-gnomevfs.i386.rpm package due to the dependencies requirement. BTW those dependencies are currently excessive as 'configure.ac' of my 'ntfsprogs-gnomevfs' was derived from the original 'gnome-vfs2' package where a lot of different modules originally needed many supportive libraries. Anton, send me offlist request if you would like it resolved by myself. As I originally expected 'ntfsprogs-gnomevfs' would get integrated back to the mainstream 'gnome-vfs2' I did not consider such excessive 'configure.ac' a problem that time. Unfortunately Alexander Larsson rejected it as it is (I agree) too much specific piece of code for Gnome-VFS. ... > Definitely. IMHO in the most typical cases, gnome isn't installed at all. Kiddin'? Such crippled system would not have any meaning, man. :-) Regards, Lace -- Jan Kratochvil; Captive: free r/w NTFS Filesystem; http://www.jankratochvil.net/ |
