[arch-general] gstreamer0.10-good-plugins need a whole load of GNOME stuff?

Nathan Wayde kumyco at konnichi.com
Wed Apr 21 11:35:11 CEST 2010

On 21/04/10 09:28, Ananda Samaddar wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 21:26:33 -0500
> "David C. Rankin"<drankinatty at suddenlinkmail.com>  wrote:
>> 	It still amazes me how people will take the position that all
>> associated with Gnome must be 'crap'. No don't get me wrong, I have
>> no arguments with your basic complaint that unnecessary dependencies
>> need not be included with the gstreamer packages. In fact, I agree.
>> 	However, that notwithstanding, the general premise asserted
>> in the comment "GNOME crap" is just flat wrong. Now I was a KDE guy,
>> did a lot of beta work with KDE4 and also enjoy enlightenment, the
>> 'boxtops', windowmaker and recently Gnome. From first-hand
>> experience, I can tell you gnome is not crap. It is a solid desktop
>> built on the metacity wm that does a great many things right and a
>> handful of things I would do differently if I wrote desktops and
>> wm's, but on balance is an excellent desktop.
>> 	Not to mention, it is just down right gorgeous:
>> (152k)
>> http://www.3111skyline.com/dl/img/ss/gnome/BlueNightII.scaled.jpg
>> 	Oh well, at least the gstreamer packages stripped of
>> unnecessary dependencies will be a great addition to AUR. Thank you
>> for that. But no need to deride a desktop just because whoever
>> packaged it last included a few unneeded dependencies :p
> Yes it was an unfortunate choice of words.  I don't think GNOME is crap,
> I'm just not enamoured with the direction it seems to be headed in,
> i.e. GNOME Shell.  I can do without shiny stuff like that.  Previous to
> my switching to XFCE I was a GNOME user for a very long time.  I reckon
> GNOME 3.0 will be just as much of a PR nightmare as KDE4 was and
> continues to be.
> It frustrates me that core technologies can depend on a long
> list of dependencies for another desktop environment.  Try installing
> gstreamer0.10-plugins-good if you're not running GNOME and you'll see
> what I mean.
> Ananda
Do you mind listing these Gnome dependencies, or at least your proposed 
I've looked at this and I can see only 2 (gconf and libsoup-gnome). 
Ofcourse that is based on the assumption that the pacma dependencies are 
correct(e.g good-plugins depends on x,y,z but only x is listed because 
it also depends only y and z).

More information about the arch-general mailing list