Am Samstag, 5. November 2011, 22:14:15 schrieb Tollef Fog Heen:
> ]] Hendrik Sattler
>
> | Am Freitag, 4. November 2011, 20:55:24 schrieb Tollef Fog Heen:
> | > So since gnome-shell actually needs gnome-bluetooth, the dependency
> | > should be demoted to a Recommends?
> |
> | Needs? Why should a
]] Hendrik Sattler
| Am Freitag, 4. November 2011, 20:55:24 schrieb Tollef Fog Heen:
| > So since gnome-shell actually needs gnome-bluetooth, the dependency
| > should be demoted to a Recommends?
|
| Needs? Why should a desktop _need_ bluetooth?
Maybe it uses the gnome-bluetooth DBus APIs uncon
]] Christoph Anton Mitterer
(please don't Cc me on mails to lists, it's rude and against the mailing
list etiquette)
[...]
| > I believe the Gnome packaging team would be happy to accept more members
| > if somebody wants to work on this and keep maintaining it.
|
| You shouln't take my comment
On Fri, 2011-11-04 at 20:55 +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> So since gnome-shell actually needs gnome-bluetooth, the dependency
> should be demoted to a Recommends?
Well but then it would be enough for gnome-shell to depend on it.
And one should perhaps try to, whether it's easy to patch it, that
Josselin Mouette wrote:
>
> Worse, it would let metapackages migrate to testing without the
> appropriate dependencies.
Then _this_ problem should be fixed and not used as a justification to use
Depends, either at the britney side or by providing "enforcing"
metapackages, not supposed to be use
Am Freitag, 4. November 2011, 20:55:24 schrieb Tollef Fog Heen:
> So since gnome-shell actually needs gnome-bluetooth, the dependency
> should be demoted to a Recommends?
Needs? Why should a desktop _need_ bluetooth? It's not even common to have
bluetooth hardware.
HS
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
Le vendredi 04 novembre 2011 à 18:17 +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer a
écrit :
> Nevertheless,.. why cant you make the metapackages to make more use of
> recommends instead of depends.
Because doing so is like ensuring there will be some systems that don’t
work correctly, wasting our time on bug
]] Christoph Anton Mitterer
| I've also had/have several times problems with those meta pacakges
| forcing me to install stuff I don't like (or I consider even unsecure).
|
| NM is surely an example of this (just grep CVE in the changelog).
One CVE in the seven years it's been in the archive?
Hi.
I've also had/have several times problems with those meta pacakges
forcing me to install stuff I don't like (or I consider even unsecure).
NM is surely an example of this (just grep CVE in the changelog).
Another one is gnome-bluetooth... there are so many systems which don't
have bluetooth
* Josselin Mouette [03 18:53 +0100]:
> Le jeudi 03 novembre 2011 à 15:26 +0100, Elimar Riesebieter a écrit :
> > Hmm, does NM works if nis runs ? nis daemon has by default no
> > time-out, starts before NM provides a network and locks the machine
> > lng time 'til root can become access t
Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
And I believe that NM should not be something gnome should depend on as
there are various other ways to configure your network. Imho it should
Recommend network-manage | wicd-gtk | similar-tools-if-they-exist.
Those packages do not provide the NetworkManager DBus interface
Laurent Bigonville écrivait (wrote) :
> Well as already said, gnome-core meta-package depends on official core
> GNOME modules, which network-manager is part of. If you don't want to
> install network-manager, don't install gnome-core meta-package.
I don't want to have to know which packages I h
Florian Reitmeir écrivait (wrote) :
> Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> >]] Florian Reitmeir
> >| i believe a way of installing network-manager, but disabling it
> >| completly would be enough for many people.
>
> >like update-rc.d disable network-manager or dpkg-divert --rename --local
> >/usr/sbin/Netw
Le jeudi 03 novembre 2011 à 15:26 +0100, Elimar Riesebieter a écrit :
> Hmm, does NM works if nis runs ? nis daemon has by default no
> time-out, starts before NM provides a network and locks the machine
> lng time 'til root can become access to stop nis.
You don’t use NIS on a desktop machin
Am 03.11.2011 15:26, schrieb Elimar Riesebieter:
> Hmm, does NM works if nis runs ? nis daemon has by default no
> time-out, starts before NM provides a network and locks the machine
> lng time 'til root can become access to stop nis.
If that is true, this is a serious flaw in nis and really n
* Laurent Bigonville [01 14:14 +0100]:
> Le Tue, 1 Nov 2011 12:31:26 +,
> Ian Jackson a écrit :
>
> > Josselin Mouette writes ("Bug#645656: network-manager in Gnome"):
> > > Le lundi 31 octobre 2011 à 16:37 +, Ian Jackson a écrit :
> > &g
Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
]] Florian Reitmeir
| i believe a way of installing network-manager, but disabling it
| completly would be enough for many people.
like update-rc.d disable network-manager or dpkg-divert --rename --local
/usr/sbin/NetworkManager or just using equivs?
sure, it also woul
]] Florian Reitmeir
Hi,
| i believe a way of installing network-manager, but disabling it
| completly would be enough for many people.
like update-rc.d disable network-manager or dpkg-divert --rename --local
/usr/sbin/NetworkManager or just using equivs?
Cheers,
--
Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is use
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 17:54:14 +0100, Florian Reitmeir
wrote:
>i believe a way of installing network-manager, but disabling it
>completly would be enough for many people.
I would be misleading if a software is installed, but disabled. Leads
debugging people into the wrong direction.
Greetings
Marc
On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 15:23:05 -0700
Josh Triplett wrote:
> Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> > And I believe that NM should not be something gnome should depend on as
> > there are various other ways to configure your network. Imho it should
> > Recommend network-manage | wicd-gtk | similar-tools-if-they-exis
Le mardi 01 novembre 2011 à 15:23 -0700, Josh Triplett a écrit :
> Those packages do not provide the NetworkManager DBus interface expected
> by other components of GNOME.
And anyway, why care? Metapackages are not a supermarket.
--
.''`. Josselin Mouette
: :' :
`. `'
`-
signature.asc
On 11/01/2011 11:23 PM, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
>> And I believe that NM should not be something gnome should depend on as
>> there are various other ways to configure your network. Imho it should
>> Recommend network-manage | wicd-gtk | similar-tools-if-they-exist.
>
> Those p
Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> And I believe that NM should not be something gnome should depend on as
> there are various other ways to configure your network. Imho it should
> Recommend network-manage | wicd-gtk | similar-tools-if-they-exist.
Those packages do not provide the NetworkManager DBus interfa
Josselin Mouette writes ("Re: Bug#645656: network-manager in Gnome"):
> Le mardi 01 novembre 2011 à 13:42 +, Ian Jackson a écrit :
> > Is there some other metapackage that can be installed to get a useful
> > Gnome system but without n-m ?
>
> Yes: gnome-se
Jon Dowland writes ("Re: Bug#645656: network-manager in Gnome"):
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 02:56:53PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > We should do it when we judge that the benefits are worth the costs.
> > In this particular case the costs seem to be minimal. There isn&
> Jon Dowland writes:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 02:56:53PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> We should do it when we judge that the benefits are worth the costs.
>> In this particular case the costs seem to be minimal. There isn't
>> even a direct patch-carrying cost, since the dependency
On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 10:21:04AM -0400, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 01:42:47PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Yes, that much is obvious. So the answer is that there is no harm in
> > actually removing network-manager.
>
> There is harm in diverging from upstream. We're a
Le mardi 01 novembre 2011 à 13:42 +, Ian Jackson a écrit :
> Is there some other metapackage that can be installed to get a useful
> Gnome system but without n-m ?
Yes: gnome-session or gnome-fallback-session should now contain the
actual dependencies for a minimal desktop to actually work.
On 11/01/2011 05:54 PM, Florian Reitmeir wrote:
[...]
> i believe a way of installing network-manager, but disabling it
> completly would be enough for many people.
Although harddisk space is cheap these days, this should not be the preferred
way.
--
Bernd Zeimetz
On 11/01/2011 03:21 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 01:42:47PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> Yes, that much is obvious. So the answer is that there is no harm in
>> actually removing network-manager.
>
> There is harm in diverging from upstream. We're a software
> distribu
On 11/01/2011 04:46 PM, Jon Dowland wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 02:56:53PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> We should do it when we judge that the benefits are worth the costs.
>> In this particular case the costs seem to be minimal. There isn't
>> even a direct patch-carrying cost, since the dep
On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 02:56:53PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> We should do it when we judge that the benefits are worth the costs.
> In this particular case the costs seem to be minimal. There isn't
> even a direct patch-carrying cost, since the dependency is expressed
> in our own control files.
Stefano Zacchiroli writes ("Re: Bug#645656: network-manager in Gnome"):
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 01:42:47PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Yes, that much is obvious. So the answer is that there is no harm in
> > actually removing network-manager.
>
> There is
Laurent Bigonville writes ("Bug#645656: network-manager in Gnome"):
> Well as already said, gnome-core meta-package depends on official core
> GNOME modules, which network-manager is part of. If you don't want to
> install network-manager, don't install gnome-core
Le Tue, 1 Nov 2011 12:31:26 +,
Ian Jackson a écrit :
> Josselin Mouette writes ("Bug#645656: network-manager in Gnome"):
> > Le lundi 31 octobre 2011 à 16:37 +, Ian Jackson a écrit :
> > > I agree with the original submitter of this bug that
> > >
On 11/01/2011 01:31 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Josselin Mouette writes ("Bug#645656: network-manager in Gnome"):
>> Le lundi 31 octobre 2011 à 16:37 +, Ian Jackson a écrit :
>>> I agree with the original submitter of this bug that network-manager
>>> needs
Josselin Mouette writes ("Bug#645656: network-manager in Gnome"):
> Le lundi 31 octobre 2011 à 16:37 +, Ian Jackson a écrit :
> > I agree with the original submitter of this bug that network-manager
> > needs to be optional. In particular, gnome-core should not pul
37 matches
Mail list logo
