On Wed, 2008-07-23 at 09:28 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 08:44:22PM +0100, Tim Jackson wrote: > > Please may we have an additional option "None"? > > > > I cannot see any useful purpose for this other than to make > > non-technical or new users wonder why we have two names for one piece of > > software, one of which nobody uses and doesn't appear to bear any > > resemblance to anything other than some bad, cliquey in-joke. > > > > Fortunately we don't use it *quite* as prominently as some other Linux > > distributions (why on earth would I want to admit to someone that I use > > an operating system called "potato"?) but these names still make me cringe. > > ... and while we're at it, can we please get rid of the "cute" names > for ordinary software? I was trying to blow away unused packages > yesterday and was wondering what on earth "libpurple" (48MB) > "gutenprint-foomatic" (49MB) "poppler" (14MB) etc do. > > ..... and while I'm grumbling, at least "libgweather" has a useful > name. But why on earth is it almost 50MB in size?? And there are > three copies of it installed on my machine? > Sneaky way to change the subject of this thread. To answer your question: libgweather contains a translated location database. That takes up 95% of the package size. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
