Ng Oon-Ee wrote:
Design simplicity? How is --enable-dbus less simple than --disable-dbus or the equivalents?
My argument was "--enable-dbus" vs "" ie the defaults.
Simplicity isn't a hammer with which to attack every package that doesn't conform to minimalism by your definition.
Yes you can. Otherwise what is there difference between arch and ubuntu or whatever your prefered desktop os is?
Are you suggesting the removal of KDE/Gnome from the repos? Because to disable dbus would require:- a) Parallel packages be maintained with dbus enabled for usage of gnome and the like packages OR b) Gnome and the like will have to be moved to AUR/community since they would need recompiling some core packages for dbus support.
I suggest fixing them instead, so they compile with the default options of their dependencies. Preferable fixing them upstream of course.
Neither of the options seems much like design simplicity to me.
I have provided a way that confirms with the arch way.
It would be good if the UNIX way (tm) or the Arch Way (tm) is not treated as some kind of religious doctrine.
It is what arch is based on. I can't see why people who follow some projects root ideas have to leave the project because somone else has other ideas.
Systems evolve and grow, and the desktop does as well, thankfully.
And thankfully they grow beyond your gnome/kde world :) -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies