| 1 |
On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Michael Orlitzky <mjo@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> Why does dev-java/icedtea try to pull in GTK (and thus X) |
| 4 |
> on a headless server? That stuff belongs in a desktop profile, not in |
| 5 |
> the base one. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
The base profile isn't "headless server" - it is just generic. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Somebody could create a headless server profile that set USE=-X and |
| 10 |
the necessary tweaks when necessary to handle specific packages. |
| 11 |
Having mix-ins would help with this by reducing the costs of adding |
| 12 |
profiles so that we can offer more choices like this. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Users can of course set USE=-* if they really want a minimal system, |
| 15 |
and build up from there. However, a minimal profile would probably be |
| 16 |
a better solution if somebody wanted to create one. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
The problem is that if you treat the base profile as "minimal" then |
| 19 |
you lose the ability to maintain an upstream-default profile (unless |
| 20 |
you end up with a huge package.use.force/mask file which IMO is the |
| 21 |
wrong place to put stuff like this). I think that upstream-defaults |
| 22 |
is a more sensible base than something intended to be minimal. It is |
| 23 |
far easier to let all the packages specify defaults individually and |
| 24 |
then make large-scale adjustments (up or down) to these, than to try |
| 25 |
to achieve a "default" position from one that just has everything |
| 26 |
turned off. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Rich |
Archives