Hi,
I wanted to run another set of updates in rawhide and noticed one thing I think is very bad - gnome-panel pushes tomboy which in turn pushes all the C# stuff in. I simply don't understand why should gnome-panel require tomboy (the more it is turned off safely on archs where tomboy isn't available and the more it worked without problems without it so far). Until this is fixed I will either rebuild gnome-panel package without the dependency on tomboy, or stay with gnome-panel-2.19.92-4.fc8.
Thanks, Martin
Martin Sourada wrote:
Hi,
I wanted to run another set of updates in rawhide and noticed one thing I think is very bad - gnome-panel pushes tomboy which in turn pushes all the C# stuff in. I simply don't understand why should gnome-panel require tomboy (the more it is turned off safely on archs where tomboy isn't available and the more it worked without problems without it so far). Until this is fixed I will either rebuild gnome-panel package without the dependency on tomboy, or stay with gnome-panel-2.19.92-4.fc8.
Thanks, Martin
Why the push for C# applications? Is it a SuSE & Microsoft move?
Jim
Jim Cornette wrote:
Martin Sourada wrote:
Hi,
I wanted to run another set of updates in rawhide and noticed one thing I think is very bad - gnome-panel pushes tomboy which in turn pushes all the C# stuff in. I simply don't understand why should gnome-panel require tomboy (the more it is turned off safely on archs where tomboy isn't available and the more it worked without problems without it so far). Until this is fixed I will either rebuild gnome-panel package without the dependency on tomboy, or stay with gnome-panel-2.19.92-4.fc8.
Thanks, Martin
Why the push for C# applications? Is it a SuSE & Microsoft move?
The OP's question was reasonable. You are adding unnecessary flames to it. Don't do that. I assume it was done to pull in Tomboy by default since it part of GNOME and installed by default but can probably be done better via comps.xml. Same goes for gthumb and GNOME volume manager.
Rahul
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Jim Cornette wrote:
Why the push for C# applications? Is it a SuSE & Microsoft move?
The OP's question was reasonable. You are adding unnecessary flames to it. Don't do that. I assume it was done to pull in Tomboy by default since it part of GNOME and installed by default but can probably be done better via comps.xml. Same goes for gthumb and GNOME volume manager.
Rahul
Adding it to comps.xml sounds great to me. I don't find value in a program like tomboy.
Though commenting further on a SuSE and Microsoft conspiracy to change the code base for all of GNOME into C# is a tempting subject to explore off of the list.
No mono please.
Jim
On Wed, 2007-09-19 at 10:08 +0200, Martin Sourada wrote:
Hi,
I wanted to run another set of updates in rawhide and noticed one thing I think is very bad - gnome-panel pushes tomboy which in turn pushes all the C# stuff in. I simply don't understand why should gnome-panel require tomboy (the more it is turned off safely on archs where tomboy isn't available and the more it worked without problems without it so far). Until this is fixed I will either rebuild gnome-panel package without the dependency on tomboy, or stay with gnome-panel-2.19.92-4.fc8.
Tomboy was added to the default configuration because a lot of people find it very useful. Pulling it in via comps would be better, except for the fact that the panel currently insists on putting up an error dialog if a configured applet is missing. I've filed a bug about getting rid of that error message in certain situations. Once that is done, we'll drop the requires for tomboy and fast-user-switch-applet and rely on comps to pull it in.
And if somebody wrote a lighter tomboy replacement that didn't use mono, we'd probably use that instead. But so far, nobody has.
Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Wed, 2007-09-19 at 10:08 +0200, Martin Sourada wrote:
Hi,
I wanted to run another set of updates in rawhide and noticed one thing I think is very bad - gnome-panel pushes tomboy which in turn pushes all the C# stuff in. I simply don't understand why should gnome-panel require tomboy (the more it is turned off safely on archs where tomboy isn't available and the more it worked without problems without it so far). Until this is fixed I will either rebuild gnome-panel package without the dependency on tomboy, or stay with gnome-panel-2.19.92-4.fc8.
Tomboy was added to the default configuration because a lot of people find it very useful. Pulling it in via comps would be better, except for the fact that the panel currently insists on putting up an error dialog if a configured applet is missing.
Can you drop the gthumb requirement from g-v-m and use comps instead?
Rahul
On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 09:35:29AM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Wed, 2007-09-19 at 10:08 +0200, Martin Sourada wrote:
Hi,
I wanted to run another set of updates in rawhide and noticed one thing I think is very bad - gnome-panel pushes tomboy which in turn pushes all the C# stuff in. I simply don't understand why should gnome-panel require tomboy (the more it is turned off safely on archs where tomboy isn't available and the more it worked without problems without it so far). Until this is fixed I will either rebuild gnome-panel package without the dependency on tomboy, or stay with gnome-panel-2.19.92-4.fc8.
Tomboy was added to the default configuration because a lot of people find it very useful. Pulling it in via comps would be better, except for the fact that the panel currently insists on putting up an error dialog if a configured applet is missing. I've filed a bug about getting rid of that error message in certain situations. Once that is done, we'll drop the requires for tomboy and fast-user-switch-applet and rely on comps to pull it in.
So, what you're saying is that it's impossible to run a mono-free gnome-based system without breaking dependencies? And that's just because "a lot of people find it useful"? Stop joking, please. Error message is not a reason to make it a dependency IMHO.
And if somebody wrote a lighter tomboy replacement that didn't use mono, we'd probably use that instead. But so far, nobody has.
That doesn't mean you have to force the bloat of mono on everyone.
Regards, R.