On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 12:39:40PM -0700, Luca Barbato wrote: > On 04/05/12 11:37, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > > On 5/4/12 8:21 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote: > >> My 2 cents: The Chromium project really doesn't have any motivation to > >> make it optional since their end product is Google Chrome and they > >> target a given version of Ubuntu. I think a patch to make them > >> optional might be accepted, but it probably isn't going to happen > >> otherwise. > > > > Another point is that too many USE flags for such a big and complex > > package as www-client/chromium would make testing much much harder, and > > create many configurations upstream would not support. > > I'll check with upstream if that would be a huge problem for them, we > have 6 useflags and we'd bump them to 8. Firefox has twice of them. > > If nobody else wants to I could have a look and see how hard is to make > that nicer for our non-udev/non-dbus users on linux.
Why do we really care about non-udev and non-dbus users? It's only going to get worse and worse if people don't want to use these core, base libaries of the Linux "stack". Yes, you can create a system without them, but in this day and age, why would you want to? Are you saving memory? (nope), time? (nope), complexity? (not really). Remember, you are passing the complexity of insisting that you do not want these things to the people managing the packages and trying to support the system in so many different combinations. Why someone would want to run Chromium on a system without udev or dbus is just looney... greg k-h
