That's fair. I just thought it might be "cleaner" to get rid of it. I didn't think of the support requirements, I will admit. :) Dan, you can disregard the feature request that I filed (unless you've changed your mind). As per Martti's pointing out that this wasn't the right list, and as I couldn't figure out which one was, I just filed a report in Flyspray. David J. Haines dhaines@gmail.com On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 5:35 PM, David J. Haines <dhaines@gmail.com> wrote:
All,
I was wondering whether it would be perhaps closer to KISS and/or more logically coherent not to have pacman-mirrorlist as a dependency of
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Martti Kühne <mysatyre@gmail.com> wrote: pacman.
You don't actually need the mirrors to use pacman, and if you maintain a local mirror or build your own packages with ABS, /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist just gets in the way and/or becomes cruft.
Thoughts?
Well, in case of Archlinux, that dependency makes totally sense. Pacman delivered without any mirrorlist would be very confusing to new users. I guess you're looking at Archlinux' pacman PKGBUILD file, which I assume is of course part of the Archlinux project, not of the pacman project. A change of package name to archlinux-mirrorlist on that front would make sense indeed. But that request I guess should be made on a different mailing list.
For Arch, it doesn't really make sense to have pacman without a mirror list, and I'm not interested in dealing with 50 bug reports to save someone one package install and 10KB saved on their system.
There is no reason you can't point your pacman.conf at any other server file, there is no reason it needs to be only an "Include = /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist", so keep that in mind.
-Dan