On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 3:55 AM, Andrei Thorp <garoth@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > +1 that I haven't had trouble with gconf really. At the moment, I > don't run it and aside from some warnings from some apps, it's > generally been fine too. > > -AT > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 6:30 PM, Hussam Al-Tayeb <ht990332@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Sat, 2009-04-25 at 02:28 +0200, hollunder@xxxxxx wrote: >>> On Fri, 24 Apr 2009 23:01:24 +0300 >>> Hussam Al-Tayeb <ht990332@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> > On Thu, 2009-04-23 at 20:33 +0200, JM wrote: >>> > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 5:20 PM, Jan de Groot <jan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> > > wrote: >>> > > > On Thu, 2009-04-23 at 17:17 +0200, JM wrote: >>> > > >> On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 11:29 PM, Jan de Groot >>> > > >> <jan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> > > >> > On Mon, 2009-03-30 at 22:48 +0200, JM wrote: >>> > > >> >> Hello, >>> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> I noticed that libsoup in [testing] depends on gconf, is that >>> > > >> >> really necessary? Libsoup is a dependency for some >>> > > >> >> desktop-agnostic applications such as Midori (through its >>> > > >> >> dependency on libwebkit) or hardinfo (currently in AUR). >>> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> Regards, >>> > > >> >> JM >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > This is a temporary bugfix. At this moment the libproxy code >>> > > >> > in libsoup is unstable, so the libsoup developers decided to >>> > > >> > disable libproxy and use gconf instead for proxy detection. >>> > > >> > The changelog states that it's a temporary solution that will >>> > > >> > be worked out for 2.26.0. With 2.26.1, the dependencies will >>> > > >> > be the same as we had with the 2.25.x release which was in >>> > > >> > testing for a while. >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> >>> > > >> libsoup 2.26.1-1 still carries the dependency on gconf. Has the >>> > > >> situation changed? >>> > > >> >>> > > >> Regards, >>> > > >> JM >>> > > > >>> > > > No it hasn't, as this needs to be fixed inside libproxy. Libproxy >>> > > > is not threadsafe when it calls into gconf, so libsoup calls into >>> > > > GConf itself to get the proxy information and passes the >>> > > > information to libproxy. Until libproxy is fixed to do threadsafe >>> > > > calls into GConf, the dependency on GConf will stay. >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > > I mistakenly assumed that the problem had lied within libsoup not >>> > > libproxy. Thanks for clarifying that. >>> > > >>> > > Regards, >>> > > JM >>> > >>> > gconf only depends on orbit2>=2.14.17 gtk2>=2.16.0 libxml2>=2.7.3 >>> > policykit>=0.9 libldap>=2.3.43 >>> > It has no dependencies on "ugly" gnome libs (libgnome, libbonobo) so >>> > non gnome users shouldn't have problem with it. >>> >>> But isn't gconf a daemon? >>> There's an app in development I might want to use that uses vala and >>> gconf, and I don't know how bad that gconf daemon is.. >>> >>> regards, >>> Philipp >> >> It's perfectly safe and very well designed. It's job is to notify >> applications when their settings have been changed. For example, if you >> edit the configuration of gedit externally (not from inside gedit >> options dialog) but from gconf-editor for example, gconf daemon tells >> gedit that the settings have been changed without the need to restart >> gedit. >> > At the moment, libsoup is the only package on my system depending on gconf and orbit2. I'd just prefer to avoid it rather than keep a full-featured configuration database system for just one application. It's not that much about having a "G" as about keeping it simple. Regards, JM
