On Mon, 2010-11-29 at 10:21 +0100, Jan de Groot wrote: > On Mon, 2010-11-29 at 10:09 +0100, Philipp Überbacher wrote: > > I guess I am one of those pulse-haters. I don't care whether it's in > > [extra], some other official repo or not since I simply don't need it. > > But now mplayer pulls in libpulse, and I have no idea which consequences > > this could have. I don't see why I need to have libs for a > > soundserver that I have no use for floating around on my machine. It is > > at best unnecessary and does nothing, at worst.. I don't know. I hope I > > don't need to install GNOME to turn it off or something.. (gconf and > > stuff). > > Sorry, but this is plain. > When GNOME switched to pulse, we made the choice to boycot it and patch > our applications to use GStreamer instead. We still do that with our > GNOME packages, as we still don't want to force pulseaudio on systems. > The reason for libpulse is that without pulseaudio installed, it will > not have any function besides offering optional support for pulseaudio. > No pulseaudio with libpulse just means no pulseaudio. > We are the first binary distribution that offers you the complete choice > of pulse or not. There's not any binary distribution out there that > dares to implement pulseaudio this way. Either they force it up your ass > completely, which is the way upstream wants, or the don't support it at > all, which we used to do before. > > If you don't want that tiny lib on your system, be my guest, recompile > all your mediaplayers to get rid of all those optional codecs for media > you don't use. Those are useless libs too, but somehow nobody complains > about that. > Good luck getting pulse-haters to understand that a 1.14 MB package isn't going to kill their system though. Thanks JGC for your work on this. I didn't think it was possible to have such choice, and it looks like you've jumped through quite a few packaging hoops to get here.
