Ng Oon-Ee wrote:
Design simplicity? How is --enable-dbus less simple than --disable-dbus
or the equivalents?
My argument was "--enable-dbus" vs "" ie the defaults.
Simplicity isn't a hammer with which to attack every package that
doesn't conform to minimalism by your definition.
Yes you can. Otherwise what is there difference between arch and ubuntu
or whatever your prefered desktop os is?
Are you suggesting the
removal of KDE/Gnome from the repos? Because to disable dbus would
require:-
a) Parallel packages be maintained with dbus enabled for usage of gnome
and the like packages
OR
b) Gnome and the like will have to be moved to AUR/community since they
would need recompiling some core packages for dbus support.
I suggest fixing them instead, so they compile with the default options
of their dependencies. Preferable fixing them upstream of course.
Neither of the options seems much like design simplicity to me.
I have provided a way that confirms with the arch way.
It would
be good if the UNIX way (tm) or the Arch Way (tm) is not treated as some
kind of religious doctrine.
It is what arch is based on. I can't see why people who follow some
projects root ideas have to leave the project because somone else has
other ideas.
Systems evolve and grow, and the desktop
does as well, thankfully.
And thankfully they grow beyond your gnome/kde world :)
--
Arvid
Asgaard Technologies
