Larry Stotler wrote:

... That's because it is probably already installed because it was a dependency for something or other. I've been frustrated by this for years having to install support for stuff I don't have like ISDN, bluetooth, palm utilities, etc. Heck, SaX even has a dependency for the intel 915 chipset, which was never available on a mac. When you get right down to it, it's not just openSUSE's devs. It also has to do with the dependencies that the authors feel the need to impose.

So tell me, Larry, would you really rather have tens to hundreds of thousands of individual library files to find and choose from when you're installing or developing software, or hundreds of packages, each containing dozens to hundreds of library files, most of which you probably don't need for a particular application? And may not need for any application you will use? John Perry -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 4:35 PM, John Andersen wrote:

So tell me, Larry, would you really rather have tens to hundreds of thousands of individual library files to find and choose from when you're installing or developing software, or hundreds of packages, each containing dozens to hundreds of library files, most of which you probably don't need for a particular application? And may not need for any application you will use?

No. I'd rather not have to install support for hardware I can't use on a particular machine. Since I'm not a programming, I have no idea how those libraries work. I just don't understand why someone would program in a hardware dependency in a program in order to add a possible functionality to that program. In SaX's case, the i915 chipset support isn't a big deal, but when you are installing support for ISDN, 1394, SCSI, bluetooth, irda, etc, it gets to be a bit ridiculous. If your time management program supports your PDA, then it should be an option IF you have that pda. If I use a Windows CE based PDA, why do I need compatitbilty for a Palm or Blackberry? Yes, it's a minor issue, but it's an issue. Consider the problem in the beta/rc of 11.0 where there was a requirement for the thinkpad fingerprint scanner for networking. How many people even have that? 1 in 100,000? And how many Thinkpad users have it? None of my thinkpads have one, and I have about 8.

The question you pose suggest that the alternative to bogus dependencies is to get rid of packages all together. That is not at all true, and you know it.

I never said to get rid of the packages. I would just like to see more devs consider what people will actually use before forcing a dependency. What's the old saying - 80% of users only use 20% of the features. That's where a lot of the code bloat comes from. That's why I had to have 2GB for SuSE in 1999 where 98 could make do wuth 250-500MB. Not everyone has the newest and faster hardware. This Thinkpad X21 only supports 384MB RAM. The more ram I have to waste for unneeded services and stuff is taking away m ability to be productive. Now, I do taboo many programs like openoffice, beagle, compiz(on my slower machines), apparmour, etc. openSUSE's dependency resolution has come a long wa in the last few years. openoffice used to be an actual dependency at one point. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Wednesday 06 August 2008 13:58, Larry Stotler wrote:

On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 4:35 PM, John Andersen wrote:

...

...

No. I'd rather not have to install support for hardware I can't use on a particular machine. Since I'm not a programming, I have no idea how those libraries work.

Why don't you just ignore the stuff? Is it really getting in the way of anything you want or need to do?

I just don't understand why someone would program in a hardware dependency in a program in order to add a possible functionality to that program.

Dependency management in large software programs or systems is one of the most onerous aspects and it's vert often easier _not_ to produce minimal configurations in every or even most cases.

...

I never said to get rid of the packages. I would just like to see more devs consider what people will actually use before forcing a dependency.

What is the down-side of a spurious dependency? A little disk space occupied. The ratio of OS and application data to other data on systems is going down all the time, making the overhead of loose dependency management less significant all the time.

What's the old saying - 80% of users only use 20% of the features. That's where a lot of the code bloat comes from.

"Code bloat" is a bugbear for people who don't have to minimize it. What are they called? Oh, yeah: Pundits. Just ignore the stuff. It's not harming you.

That's why I had to have 2GB for SuSE in 1999 where 98 could make do wuth 250-500MB.

And what percentage of your hard drive was it before compared to now? You're complaining about a non-issue. This is a classic of computer critic nonsense. Computers do more now over an ever widening hardware base. The kind of minimalism you seem to want is just not economically justifiable.

Not everyone has the newest and faster hardware.

But many do. Optimizing separate configurations for old and new alike is a lot of work for no change in functionality. It's not worth it.

...

Randall Schulz -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

John Andersen wrote:

On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 1:28 PM, John E. Perry wrote:

...

... So tell me, Larry, would you really rather have tens to hundreds of thousands of individual library files to find and choose from when you're installing or developing software, or hundreds of packages, each containing dozens to hundreds of library files, most of which you probably don't need for a particular application? And may not need for any application you will use?

John Perry

The question you pose suggest that the alternative to bogus dependencies is to get rid of packages all together.

That is not at all true, and you know it.

In an open-source world, where hundreds of independent workers develop their own software and there is no Big Boss to enforce consistency and control configuration, it is inevitable that there will be a lot of duplication and a lot of modules that almost work together, or almost provide exactly what a particular developer thinks he needs. I think what we have is well worth the penalty in bloat and duplication. If you don't, do what the embedded developers do -- sift through the libraries and pick the individual files you want, or roll your own. Sure, we might do the QNX thing and have much of what linux gives us in a package that's a tiny fraction of the size of gnu/linux. But QNX has a Big Boss who can impose that kind of constraint on his dozen or two developers. And you have to buy qnx. jp -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org