| 1 |
Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Freitag 15 Mai 2009, pk wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> DeviceKit isn't even in portage yet and not many packages support it. I |
| 5 |
>>> don't even know if the devs will change and improve the configs much, if |
| 6 |
>>> at all. The problem with hal is that it's code base is a mess, and it's |
| 7 |
>>> design is a mish- mash of stuff throwwn together. At least, that's what |
| 8 |
>>> the lead hal dev says |
| 9 |
>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/DeviceKit#Dependencies |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> I haven't looked into this in any depth but it seems like Devicekit will |
| 12 |
>> not be an improvement (looks like it brings in the "kitchen sink" in |
| 13 |
>> dependencies - I'm also "allergic" to gnome)... |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> in my opinion a 'solution' that is based on the worst desktop (gnome) is the |
| 16 |
> worst possible 'solution'. What about kde users? what about xfce? fluxbox? |
| 17 |
> enlightenment users? |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> Fedora screws everybody over. Like always. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Um... that dependencies list is the dependencies for the feature to get |
| 23 |
done for Fedora. I would be shocked if the HAL replacement is dependent |
| 24 |
on Nautilus. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Honestly, most of the libraries on that list are stuff likely already in |
| 27 |
the LSB (which btw includes both gnome stuff as well as Qt and Phonon) |
| 28 |
so while it may not be in your system it's not crazy to depend on. Tone |
| 29 |
down the Gnome/Fedora hate. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Aaron |
Archives