On Thu, 17 Jul 2014 19:17:10 +0200 Fabian Greffrath <fab...@greffrath.com> wrote: > Dear XFCE4 and LXDE maintainers, > > Am Donnerstag, den 17.07.2014, 15:38 +0200 schrieb Andreas Henriksson: > > Could you please ask your question about dropping evince-gtk to those > > that use it? eg. the XFCE or LXDE people. > > > > I have no objections against dropping it if noone feel they need it and > > updates their dependencies accordingly. > > I'd like to ask you to elaborate if a separate evince-gtk package is > still necessary for your purposes, please. I have given a rationale in > #755071: > > > Hi all, > > > > I wonder if a separate evince-gtk package is still necessary at all. > > If I am > > not mistaken, evince has only two more package dependencies than > > evince-gtk: > > libnautilus-extension1a and libsecret-1-0. > > > > Since evince-gtk identifies itself as "evince without GNOME keyring > > support", I > > guess it is the second dependency that is meant to get removed by the > > separate > > build. However, libsecret-1-0 has only two additional dependencies > > that aren't > > pulled in by evince[-gtk] anyway: libgcrypt11 and libsecret-common, of > > which > > the latter is an Arch: all package without further dependencies. The > > libnautilus-extension1a package in turn pulls in libselinux1. > > > > So, is this it? Do we really need a separate binary package of evince > > to avoid > > the installation of four leaf packages?
Could we have some input from the XFCE/LXDE maintainers on this matter? -- 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
