Hello, On Thu, 31 Jul 2014, Anton Aylward wrote:
On 07/31/2014 02:18 PM, David Haller wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jul 2014, Anton Aylward wrote:
On 07/31/2014 11:31 AM, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
El 31/07/14 a las #4, Anton Aylward escribió:
So, right now, given that I'm not using wayland, and as you say probably won't be for some while, can I simply delete these?
You can't. unless you want a system without X or a desktop environment. Currently removing the first package triggers removal of ~400 packages.
WTF! Why? Is this a real dependency that the code has to be there, even if we're not using Wayland, or is this simply "yes another stupid packaging issue"?
It's a matter of dynamic linking. You can either link to a lib, then you'll need that lib to be installed, or you don't. [..] Same with wayland. You'll need the libwayland*, but not wayland itself and you can ignore manual deps on it if you do now want to use wayland. [..] Each of those packages contains just the one bianry and link.
rpm -ql libwayland-client0-1.2.1-1.1.x86_64 \ libwayland-cursor0-1.2.1-1.1.x86_64 \ libwayland-server0-1.2.1-1.1.x86_64 \ libwayland-egl1-10.2.4-381.1.x86_64 [..] All that is pretty vanilla., so there is nothing further down in the call tree that would cause the dependency.
You've got that backwards. There is stuff that needs those libs, because it links to it. Which, as I tried to explain, does not neccessarily mean, those libs are actually used (or even loaded from the disks rotating rust (or flash)). AFAIK ld mmap's the libs (i.e. allocates address space), but they only get actually loaded from DRR/Flash when they're used.
Therefore it must be something in those hundreds of packages that is calling
The following 349 packages are going to be REMOVED: [..]
Linked to != actually calling in use! There may be 349 packages (indirectly) linking to libwayland*, but any of them actually _using_ that interface is probably nil. Yet. I don't know Wayland. I don't see its use (yet). I'm uninformed about it. But I know how the ELF linking works. So there might be some app somewhere amongst those 349 packages, that actually uses libwayland* when you start it and do stuff, but I guess most don't. Yet. I've not really an opinion on Wayland. But guessing from history, I'll hate it. Probably with a vengeance. Not as much as systemd, I assume. That's hard^Wimpossible to exceed.
Now in a couple of years I can see all those making use of Wayland at the lower levels of the stack, or some of them. I hope we're not running X on top of Wayland; I thought the idea was to shrink the stack.
AFAIK, Wayland is supposed to replace X11. I.e. be a X12 of some sort. As systemd replace[sd] sysvinit. I haven't looked into the details yet, but I'm already rather sure I won't like them. At all.
But why now?
Prepping for the switch to Wayland would be my guess.
Somewhere in all that tree something calls calls on of the leyland functions: http://wayland.freedesktop.org/docs/html/chap-Library.html
WHY? This isn't Wayland we're running What's really going on?
http://wayland.freedesktop.org/docs/html/chap-Introduction.html#sect-Motivat... ff. I assume. BTW: I never ever used a "Compositor" ... nor KMS. What the fuck for? -dnh, as expected, now off puking, 'scuse me PS: I boot with "splash=native vga=normal"[1], no bootsplashy thingymagummmy even installed, and start WindowMaker via startx. Thankyouverymuch. PPS: has LP has anything to do with Wayland? PPPS: has _anything_ good come out of freedesktop.org yet? Besides libs they gobbled up like freetype? [1] I could have various other stuff via some fb/vesa mode, but I can't be arsed to. I used to use the Matrox-FB with some fancy mode ... -- SMTP is cute, fluffy and goes Woof! When well treated she wags her tail, licks your face and delivers your mail. When badly treated by spammers or people running exchange/<insert other pseudo-SMTP systems here>/etc she tends to bite back. -- Simon Burr -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org