[re-adding [email protected]] Am 14.06.2015 um 17:49 schrieb Margarita Manterola: > Hi, > > El Domingo 14 Junio 2015 16:47 CEST, Michael Biebl <[email protected]> Ha > escrito: >> Am 14.06.2015 um 16:35 schrieb Margarita Manterola: >>> It's not a question of the size of the lib, but rather of the dependencies >>> that get pulled in because of it, that are totally irrelevant for >>> file-roller itself and are not needed when using a different file browser. >> And which dependencies would that be, that are of concern to you? > > The main problem is of course nautilus-data, which pulls in nautilus, which > pulls in quite a bunch of extra stuff. I guess that if nautilus-data is > dropped, the rest are rather small libs that we can probably live with > (libnautilus-extension1a and possibly others, but it's really hard to figure > out which exactly) > > Would you drop nautilus-data completely? Because if it's a Recommends it's > basically the same result.
As said, from looking at the code, it seems ok to not have a hard depends on nautilus-data, so I would drop that dependency altogether. The only additional dependency that the extension then drags in is libnautilus-extension1a. That library has no additional dependencies, which wouldn't already be required by file-roller itself or is typically installed anyway. -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
